University  of  California. 

FROM  THE    LIBRARY   OF 

DR.    FRANCIS    LIEBEK, 
Professor  of  History  and  Law  in  Columbia  College,  New  York. 


THE  GIFT  OF 

MICHAEL    REESE, 

Of  San  Francisco. 
1873. 


«, 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY, 


ADAM      G- 
ii 


Snum  cuiqno. 


NEW  YORK: 
PUBLISHED   BY  A.    B.    BURDICK 

145    NASSAU    STREET. 
18GO. 


H 


Entered  according  to  Act  of  Congress,  in  the  year  1860,  by 

ADAM    GUROWSKI, 

In  the  Clerk's  Office  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States  for  the 
Southern  District  of  New  York. 


So  ing  fntrib 
JAMES     S.    WADSWORTH, 


OF   GENESEO. 


CONTENTS. 


INTRODUCTION 

. 

PAOB 

vii 

EGYPTIANS 

I. 

1 

PHOENICIANS  . 

n. 

.       17 

LIBYANS 

in. 

.       27 

CARTHAGINIANS 

IV. 

.        31 

V. 

HEBREWS,  OR  BENI-!SRAEL           '  . 

.       35 

NABATHEANS 

VI. 

.       63 

vn. 

ASSYRIANS  AND  BABYLONIANS 

.       69 

MEDES  AND  PERSIANS 

vrn. 

.       75 

ARYAS  —  HINDUS 

IX. 

.       81 

VI  CONTENTS. 

FAGH 

X. 

CHINESE         .  .  .  .  .  .89 

XI. 

GREEKS          .  .  .  .  .  .97 

XII. 

ROMANS — REPUBLICANS        .  .  .  .125 

xm. 

ROMANS — POLITICAL  SLATES  .  .  .149 

XIV. 

CHRISTIANITY:  ITS  CHURCHES  AND  CREEDS  .     165 

XV. 

GAULS  .  .  .  .  .173 

XVI. 

GERMANS       .  .  .  .  .  .183 

XVII. 

LONGOBARDS — ITALIANS  .  .  .  .199 

XVHI. 

FRANKS — FRENCH     .  207 

» 

XIX. 

BRITONS,  ANGLO-SAXONS,  ENGLISH  .  .  .    223 

XX. 

SLAVI,  SLAVONIANS,  SLAVES,  RUSSIANS       .  .233 

XXI. 
CONCLUSION  ...  251 


FOR  the  first  time  in  the  annals  of  humanity,  do- 
mestic slavery,  or  the  system  of  chattelhood  and  traffic 
in  man,  is  erected  into  a  religious,  social  and  political 
creed.  This  new  creed  has  its  thaumaturgus,  its  tem- 
ples, its  altars,  its  worship,  its  divines,  its  theology, 
its  fanatical  devotees;  it  has  its  moralists,  its  savants 
and  sentimentalists,  its  statesmen  and  its  publicists. 
The  articles  of  this  new  faith  are  preached  and  con- 
fessed by  senators  and  representatives  in  the  highest 
councils  of  the  American  people,  as  well  as  in  the 
legislatures  of  the  respective  States ;  they  are  boldly 
proclaimed  by  the  press,  and  by  platform  orators  and 
public  missionaries ;  in  a  word,  this  new  faith  over- 
shadows thes  whole  religious,  social,  intellectual,  po- 
litical and  economical  existence  of  a  large  portion  of 
the  Republic. 

The  less  fervent  disciples  consider  domestic  slavery 
as  an  eminently  practical  matter,  and  regard  those  of 


VU1 


an  opposite  opinion  as  abstruse  theorizers ;  and  history 
is  called  in  and  ransacked  for  the  purpose  of  justify- 
ing the  present  by  the  past. 

Well :  history  contains  all  the  evidences — multifa- 
rious and  decisive. 

It  is  asserted  that  domestic  slavery  has  always  been 
a  constructive  social  element :  history  shows  that  it 
has  always  been  destructive.  History  authoritatively 
establishes  the  fact  that  slavery  is  the  most  corroding 
social  disease,  and  one,  too,  which  acts  most  fatally 
on  the  slaveholding  element  in  a  community. 

Not  disease,  but  health,  is  the  normal  condition  of 
man's  physical  organism  :  not  oppression  but  freedom 
is  the  normal  condition  of  human  society.  The  laws 
of  history  are  as  absolute  as  the  laws  of  nature  or 
the  laws  of  hygiene.  As  an  individual  cannot  with 
impunity  violate  hygienic  law — as  nature  always 
avenges  every  departure  from  her  eternal  order :  so 
nations  and  communities  cannot  safely  deviate  from 
the  laws  of  history,  still  less  violate  them  with  impu- 
nity. History  positively  demonstrates  that  slavery 
is  not  one  of  the  natural  laws  of  the  human  race,  any 
more  than  disorders  and  monstrosities  are  normal 
conditions  of  the  human  body. 

History  demonstrates  that  slavery  is   not   coeval 


IX 

with,  nor  inherent  in,  human  society,  but  is  the  off- 
spring of  social  derangement  and  decay.  The  health- 
iest physical  organism  may,  under  certain  conditions, 
develop  from  within,  or  receive  by  infection  from 
without,  diseases  which  are  coeval,  so  to  speak,  with 
the  creation,  and  which  hover  perpetually  over  animal 
life.  The  disease,  too,  may  be  acute  or  chronic,  ac- 
cording to  the  conditions  or  predispositions  of  the 
organism.  History  teaches  that  domestic  slavery 
may,  at  times,  affect  the  healthiest  social  organism, 
and  be  developed,  like  other  social  disorders  and 
crimes,  so  to  speak,  in  the  very  womb  of  the  nation. 
As  the  tendency  of  vigorous  health  is  to  prevent 
physical  derangements  and  diseases,  so  the  tendency 
of  society  in  its  most  elevated  conception  is  to  pre- 
vent, to  limit,  to  neutralize,  if  not  wholly  to  extirpate, 
all  social  disorders.  Not  depravity  and  disease,  but 
purity  and  virtue,  are  the  normal  condition  of  the  indi- 
vidual :  not  oppression  but  freedom  is  the  normal 
condition  of  society. 

Some  investigators  and  philosophers  discover  an 
identity  between  the  progressive  development  of  the 
human  body  and  the  various  stages  of  human  so- 
ciety— beginning  writh  the  embryonic  condition  of 
both.  More  than  one  striking  analogy  certainly  ex- 


ists  between  physiological  and  pathological  laws,  and 
the  moral  and  social  principles  which  ought  to  be  ob- 
served by  man  both  as  an  individual,  and  in  the  ag- 
gregate called  society.  Thus  some  of  the  pathologic 
axioms  established  by  Eokitansky*  (the  greatest  of 
living  pathologists)  are  equally  sustained  by  the 
history  of  nations. 

"No  formation  is  incapable  of  becoming  diseased  in  one  or 
more  ways.  Several  anomalies  coexisting  in  an  organ  commonly 
stand  to  each  other  in  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect.  Thus, 
deviation  in  texture  determines  deviation  in  size,  in  form." 

The  following  pages  will  demonstrate  that  nations 
and  communities  may  become  diseased  in  many 
ways  ;  and  that  in  proportion  as  their  social  textures 
deviate  from  the  normal,  do  they  become  more  and 
more  deformed  and  demoralized. 

"All  anomalies  of  organization  involving  any  anatomical 
change  manifest  themselves  as  deviations  in  the  quantity  or 
quality  of  organic  creation,  or  else  as  a  mechanical  separation  of 
continuity.  They  are  reducible  to  irregular  number,  size,  form, 
Continuity,  and  contents." 

Oppressions,  tyrannies,  domestic  slavery,  chattel- 
hood,  are  so  many  mechanical  separations  of  conti- 
nuity, which  in  the  social  organic  creation  is  liberty. 

*  A  Manual  of  Pathological  Anatomy,  by  Carl  Rokitansky,  M.  D. 
Translated  from  the  German,  by  Edward  Swaine,  M.  D.,  Fellow  of  the 
Royal  College  of  Physicians. 


XI 

"  General  disease  engenders  the  most  various  organs  and  tex- 
tures according  to  their  innate,  general  or  individual  tendencies, 
either  spontaneously  or  by  dint  of  some  overpowering  outward 
impulse,  a  local  affection  which  reflects  the  general  disease  in  the 
peculiarity  of  its  products.  The  general  disease  becomes  local- 
ized, and,  so  to  speak,  represented  in  the  topical  affection." 

Violence  and  oppression  generated  various  and  pe- 
culiar forms  of  servitude,  until  nearly  all  of  them 
ended  in  chattelhood,  which  many  are  wont  to  con- 
sider as  a  topical  affection  of  certain  races  and  nations. 
Declining  Greece  and  Rome  in  the  past,  Russia  under 
our  own  eyes,  serve  as  illustrations. 

"  A  general  disease  not  unfrequently  finds  in  its  localization  a 
perpetual  focus  of  derivation,  with  seeming  integrity  of  the  organ- 
ism in  other  respects." 

So  nations  infected  with  slavery,  nevertheless  had 
brilliant  epochs  of  existence ;  and  this  "  seeming  in- 
tegrity of  the  organism"  misleads  many  otherwise 
averse  to  chattelhood,  and  makes  them  indifferent  to 
its  existence. 

"  "Where  several  diseases  coexist  in  an  individual,  they  are  in 
part  primary,  in  part  secondary  and  subordinate,  although  ho- 
mologous to  the  former." 

So  many  evils  are  the  lot  of  human  society,  but 
almost  all  of  them  are  secondary  and  subordinate  to 
oppression,  violence,  and  slavery. 


Xll 

"  The  issue  of  a  local  diseasein  liealth  consists  either  in  the  per- 
fect re-establishment  of  the  normal  condition,  or  else  in  partial 
recovery ;  more  or  fewer  important  residua  and  sequoias  of  the 
disease  not  incomparable  with  a  tolerably  fair  state  of  health,  re- 
maining entailed." 

The  history  of  the  slow  recovery  of  post-Roman 
Europe  from  domestic  bondage  justifies  the  application 
of  this  pathologic  axiom  to  the  social  condition  of 
nations. 

"  Issue  in  death:  1.  Through  exhaustion  of  power  and  of  organic 
matter." 

The  history  of  republican,  bnt  above  all,  of  imperial 
Rome,  demonstrates  that  its  decline  and  death  were 
caused  through  the  extinction  of  freedom,  free  labor, 
and  the  free  yeomanry,  which  in  every  state  consti- 
tutes the  power,  the  organic  matter  of  a  nation. 

"  2.  Through  the  suspended  function  of  organs  essential  to  life, 
through  palsy,  etc." 

When  the  laboring  classes  are  enslaved,  the  life  of 
a  nation  is  speedily  palsied. 

"  3.  Through  vitiation  of  the  blood." 

What  blood  is  to  the  animal  organism,  sound  social 
and  political  principles  are  to  society.  When  such 
principles  become  vitiated,  the  nation  is  on  the  path, 
of  decline  and  death. 


Xlll 

"  The  worst  malformation  is  never  so  anomalous  as  not  to  bear 
the  general  character  of  animal  life,  etc.  Even  an  individual 
organ  never  departs  from  its  normal  character  so  completely  that 
amid  even  the  greatest  disfigurement,  this  character  should  not 
be  cognizable." 

So  often  the  enslaver  and  the  slaveholding  com- 
munity may  preserve  some  features  of  the  normal  hu- 
man character,  notwithstanding  the  "  disfigurement" 
produced. 

"  The  excessive  development  of  one  part  determines  the  im- 
perfect and  retarded  development  of  another,  and  the  converse." 

So  the  oligarchic  development  retards  the  growth 
and  advancement  of  the  laboring  classes,  whether  the 
hue  be  white  or  black  :  it  prevents  or  retards  the  cul- 
ture and  civilization  of  individuals  and  communities. 

"  Various  and  manifold  as  are  the  forms  of  monstrosity,  some 
of  them  recur  with  such  uniformity  of  type  as  to  constitute  a 
regular  series." 

History  shows  that  various  as  are  the  other  social 
monstrosities,  domestic  slavery  always  recurred  with 
a  fatal  uniformity  of  type. 

"  The  genesis  of  malformation  in  the  human  body  is  still 
vailed  in  much  obscurity  despite  some  progress  made  in  science." 

Social  teratology,  or  the  science  of  monstrosities, 
easily  traces  the  origin  and  genesis  of  domestic  sla- 
very. 


XIV 

A  conscientious  study  of  the  records  of  bygone 
nations,  as  well  as  of  the  events  daily  witnessed  dur- 
ing a  decenninm,  produced  the  following  pages. 
They  complete  what  I  said  about  slavery  a  few  years 
ago.*  As  then,  so  now,  I  am  almost  wholly  unac- 
quainted with  anti-slavery  literature  in  any  of  its 
manifestations.  I  diligently  sought  for  information 
in  the  literary  and  political  productions  of  pro-slavery 
writers.  Beside  legislative  enactments,  political  dis- 
cussions, and  resolutions  by  Congress  and  the  legisla- 
tures of  the  various  Slave  States,  and  the  messages  of 
their  respective  governors,  I  read  every  thing  that 
came  within  my  reach,  even  sermons,  heaps  of  "  De 
IV  w  s  Review"  and  "  Fletcher's  Studies  on  Slavery."f 
Ah!  ... 

For  years  the  rich  resources  of  the  Astor  Library 
have  facilitated  my  general  studies,  and  the  informa- 
tion there  sought  and  found  was  enhanced  by  the 
kindest  liberality  experienced  from  Dr.  Coggswell 
and  all  his  assistants. 

And  now  let  History  unfold  her  records. 

*  "America  and  Europe,"  chap.  X. 

f  Among  the  neutral  publications  on  American  slavery,  the  most 
remarkable  and  instructive  is  the  work  entitled  "  The  Law  of  Freedom 
and  Bondage  in  the  United  States,"  by  John  Codrnan  Hurt. 


SLAVERY    IN    HISTORY. 


i. 
EGYPTIANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Wilkinson,  Rosellini,  Lepsius,    Uhkmann,   Renan,  Guttschmidt,  Bugsch, 
Birch,  De  Rouget,  Bunsen,  etc. 

Lsr  the  gray  twilight  of  history,  the  apparition  that 
first  distinctly  presents  itself  is  Egypt — that  land  of 
wonders,  standing  on  the  shores  of  the  "  venerable 
mother  the  Nile."  The  Egyptians  already  form  a 
fully-elaborated,  organic  social  structure,  nay,  a  pow- 
erful nation,  with  a  rich  material  and  intellectual 
civilization,  when  as  yet  the  commonly  accepted 
chronology  begins  to  write  only  rudimental  numbers. 

It  is  indifferent  (so  far  as  the  present  investigation 
is  concerned)  whether  this  Egyptian  culture  ascended 
or  descended  the  Nile — whether  its  cradle  was  Meroe, 
Elephantis,  Syene,  or  Thebes — or  whether  it  first 
sprang  up  and  expanded  around  Memphis.  So,  the 
first  conquerors  of  Egypt  may  have  belonged  to  the 
1 


2  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

Shemitic  or  to  the  Aryan  stock— they  may  have  en- 
tered from  Asia  by  the  Isthmus  of  Suez,  or  by  the 
Straits  of  Bab-el-Mandeb  and  the  Ked  Sea,  landing 
first  on  some  spot  in  Abyssinia  or  Nubia ;  or,  perhaps, 
the  primitive  civilizers  of  the  valley  of  the  Nile  were 
autochthones,  who  were  conquered  by  foreign  in- 
vaders. However  these  things  may  have  been, 
Egyptian  civilization  and  culture  clearly  bear  the  im- 
press of  indigenous  development. 

The  founders  of  the  Egyptian  civil,  social  and 
religious  polity  considered  agriculture  as  the  most 
sacred  occupation  of  mortals — transforming  the  rov- 
ing savage  into  a  civilized  man.  It  was  the  divine 
Osiris  who  first  taught  men  the  art  of  tilling  the  earth, 
if  indeed  he  was  not  its  inventor.  But  the  god  forged 
not  a  fetter  for  the  farmer,  and  the  Egyptian  plough 
was  not  desecrated  by  the  hands  of  a  slave. 

The  first  rays  of  history  reveal  Egypt  densely 
covered  with  farms,  villages,  and  cities,  and  divided 
into  districts  (noma\  townships,  and  communes — 
each  having  its  distinct  deity,  and  each  most  probably 
self-governing,  or  at  least  self-administering :  all  this 
in  the  earliest  epoch,  previous  to  the  first  dynasties 
of  the  Pharaohs,  and  anterior  to  the  division  of  the 
population  into  castes. 

The  division  of  a  population  into  castes,  however 
destructive  it  may  be  to  the  growth  of  individuality 
and  the  highest  freedom  in  man,  is  neither  domestic 
slavery  nor  chattelhood.  These  divisions  and  sub- 
divisions originally  consisted  simply  in  training  the 


EGYPTIANS.  3 

individuals  to  special  occupations  and  functions,  and 
so  educating  them  in  special  ideas  ;  but  not  in  making 
any  one  caste  the  property  of  .any  other.  The  grada- 
tions of  caste  constituted  no  form  of  chattelhood 
whatever. 

The  principal  castes  were  the  princes,  or  Pharaohs, 
the  priests,  the  soldiers,  and  then  the  merchants,  arti- 
ficers, farmers  and  shepherds ;  and  each  of  these, 
again,  had  numerous  subdivisions.  Together  they 
directed  and  carried  out  all  the  functions,  pursuits, 
and  industries  necessary  in  a  well-organized  com- 
munity. 

In  the  sanctuary  of  the  gods,  and  before  the  supreme 
power  of  the  Pharaohs  and  the  law,  the  priest,  the 
military  officer  or  nobleman,  the  merchant,  the  artisan, 
the  daily  laborer,  the  agriculturist,  the  shepherd,  even 
the  swineherd  (considered  the  lowest  and  most  un- 
clean)— all  wrere  equal.  They  formed,  so  to  say, 
circles  rather  independent  than  encompassed  by  each 
other.  All  castes  had  equal  civil  rights,  and  the 
same  punishments  were  administered  to  the  criminal 
irrespective  of  the  caste  to  which  he  might  belong. 
In  brief,  in  the  normal  social  structure  of  the  Egyp- 
tians there  existed  no  class  deprived  of  the  social  and 
civil  rights  enjoyed  by  all  others,  or  looked  down 
upon  as  necessarily  degraded  or  outlawed.  The  sep- 
aration between  one  caste  and  another,  moreover,  was 
neither  absolute  nor  impassable. 

The  ownership  of  the  soil  was  unequally  divided ; 
but  it  was  principally  distributed  between  the  sov- 


4  SLAVERY   IN    HISTORY. 

ereign,  the  priests,  and  the  officer-soldiers.  The  latter 
were  obliged,  in  consideration  of  the  land  held,  to 
perform  military  services  to  the  prince — a  sort  of  en- 
feoffrnent  like  that  which  rose  out  of  the  chaos  that 
succeeded  the  destruction  of  the  Roman  world. 

Peasants,  agriculturists,  and  yeomen,  fojrmed  the 
bulk  of  the  indigenous  Egyptian  population.  The 
husbandmen  either  owned  their  homestead  or  rented 
the  lands  from  the  king,  the  priesthood,  or  the  mili- 
tary caste  ;  and  they  cultivated  the  generous  soil 
either  with  their  own  hands  or  by  hired  field-laborers ; 
but  chattels  or  domestic  slaves  were  unknown. 

The  primary  cause  of  social  convulsions  and  dis- 
turbances is  always  to  be  found  in  some  great  public 
calamity:  such  was  the  celebrated  seven  years'  famine 
during  the  administration  of  Joseph,  which  resulted  in 
concentrating  in  the  hands  of  the  Pharaohs  numerous 
landed  estates,  and  these  principally  the  farms  of  the 
poorer  yeomanry.  But  even  then,  no  trace  is  to  be 
discovered  in  history  that  any  great  proportion  of  the 
agricultural  population  were  enslaved.  Their  condi- 
tion then  became  similar,  economically  and  socially, 
to  that  of  the  English  peasantry  during  the  seven- 
teenth and  eighteenth  centuries  ;  and  even  if  it  finally 
degenerated  into  something  like  the  condition  of  the 
Fellahs,  still  it  was  simply  political  oppression,  and 
not  chattelhood.  The  modern  Fellahs  are  serfs,  enjoy- 
ing all  natural  human  rights  of  worship,  family  and 
property  ;  and  are  separated  by  a  wide  gulf  from  the 
chattelism  of  modern  slavery.  If,  like  these  Fellahs, 


EGYPTIANS.  O 

the  ancient  Egyptians  were  forced  to  bow  before  the 
arbitrary  power  of  a  sovereign,  they  at  least  were  not 
the  personal  property  of  an  owner  who  had  the  power 
arbitrarily  to  dispose  of  them  as  his  interest  or  caprice 
might  dictate. 

The  population  constituting  the  Egyptian  nation, 
and  included  in  this  graded  structure  of  castes,  was 
of  varied  origin  and  descent,  or,  according  to  a  com- 
mon form  of  statement,  belonged  to  various  races. 
But  the  process  of  mixing  the  various  ethnic  elements 
with  each  other,  went  on  uninterruptedly  during  the 
almost  countless  centuries  of  the  historical  existence 
of  Egypt,  including  the  epoch  of  its  highest  political 
development  and  the  brightest  blossom  of  its  culture 
and  civilization.  In  the  remotest  period  of  Egyptian 
society,  the  three  superior  castes  were  of  a  different 
hue  of  skin  from  the  others,  and  some  ethnologists 
and  historians  assign  them  a  Shemitic  or  Japhetic 
(i.  e.,  Aryan)  origin.  But  the  optimates  were  not 
white  but  red,  and  so  they  both  considered  and  called 
themselves.  All  the  other  castes — as  artists,  ar.chi 
tects,  merchants,  mechanics,  operatives,  sailors,  agr 
culturists  and  shepherds — undoubtedly  belonged  to  th 
African  or  nesro  stock. 

O 

Egypt  teemed  with  an  active  industrial  populaf//£j 
which  furnished  countless  soldiers  to  the  army  daring 
long  centuries  of  victory.  Egyptian  history  embraces 
a  long  period  of  expansion.  Many  centuries  lay  be- 
tween the  times  of  the  Rharneses  and  of  Necho,  dur- 
ing which  the  Egyptians  conquerec?  Nubia,  Libya, 


6  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY.  * 

and  Syria,  and  reached  Kolchis.  These  armies  could 
not  be  recruited — and  positively  were  not — from  chat- 
tel slaves  ;  for  succeeding  chapters  will  show  that  it 
was  domestic  slavery  far  more  than  political  which 
tore  the  sinews  from  the  arms  of  the  nations  of 
antiquity,  and  rendered  defenceless  tjieir  states,  em- 
pires and  republics.  If  the  officers  of  the  Egyptian 
armies  were  of  a  red  extraction,  the  rank  and  file  was 
undoubtedly  of  the  negro  family.  Herodotus  says 
that  "  the  Egyptians  were  black  and  had  short,  crisped 
hair,"  and  that  "  the  skulls  of  the  Egyptians  were  by 
far  thicker  than  those  of  the  Persians — so  that  they 
could  scarcely  be  broken  by  a  big  stone,  while  a 
Persian  skull  could  be  broken  by  a  pebble."  Such 
were  the  elements,  with  so  many,  and  such  varied 
hues  of  skin,  or  pigments  mixed,  which  constituted  the 
Egyptian  people — which  formed  a  society  so  strong 
and  compact  that,  for  more  than  forty  centuries,  its 
influence  and  existence  constitute  one  of  the  most 
significant  phenomena  of  the  antique  world.  These 
hybrid  elements  elaborated  a  civilization  called  by 
modern  ethnologists  Cushitic  or  Chamitic,  in  contra- 
distinction to  the  Shemitic  and  to  the  Japhetic*  (or 
Aryan.)  The  pre-eminent  active  elements  in  this 
civilization  were  the  artists,  merchants,  and  opera- 
tives. It  was  eminent  for  mathematical  and  astronom- 
ical science,  for  architecture,  the  mechanic  arts,  and 
a  highly  elaborated  administration.  And  this  Egyp- 

*  The  term  Japhetic  is  rather  confused  and  unscientific.    It  is  used 
here  as  being  more  popularly  intelligible. 


v  EGYPTIANS.  7 

tian  or  Cliamitic  civilization,  too,  preceded  by  many 
centuries  the  Shemitic  and  Aryan  cultures. 

The  origin  of  the  denomination  Chamites  and 
Ous/iites  has  long  been  the  subject  of  numerous  ethno- 
logic researches,  while  comparative  philology,  which 
has  proved  itself  so  potent  in  the  solution  of  innumer- 
able race-problems,  lias  also  been  interrogated.  The 
question  is,  by  what  name  did  the  Egyptians  call 
themselves  or  their  land  ;  and  what  meaning  did  they 
attach  to  such  names  ?  K-M  (whence  l£am,  lEem^ 
Kemi,  Cham)  signifies  "  the  black  land  ;"  though, 
according  to  Champollion,  it  implies  uthe  pure  land;" 
while  others  give  it  the  meaning  of  "  the  sceptre." 
At  any  rate,  Cham  signifies  "  black"  in  Egyptian  and 
its  ancient  dialects — those  of  Thebes  and  Memphis, 
for  instance,  as  also  in  the  Coptic.  Egypt  proper,  was 
called  by  its  inhabitants  "  the  black  land"  on  account 
of  the  appearance  of  its  soil ;  it  was  black  in  contra- 
distinction to  the  red  land  (or  Descher,  i.  e.,  "desert") 
which  surrounded  the  Nile  valley.  The  Hebrews 
borrowed  the  word  from  the  Egyptians,  and  trans- 
ferred it  from  a  geographic  to  an  ethnical  name — or 
rather,  perhaps,  this  application  was  made  by  subse- 
quent commentators  on  the  Hebrew  writings.  Neither 
was  the  denomination  Cush  (Egyptian  l£us,  Kes-i-or, 
Kas]  used  by  the  Egyptians  for  their  own  land  or 
people.  They  employed  it,  as  would  appear,  to  de- 
nominate lands  situated  south  of  Egypt  proper ;  for 
the  Egyptian  viceroys  who  administrated  the  govern- 
ment of  these  lands  bore  the  title  of  "Sisuten  n  Kus" 


8  SLAVERY   IN"  HISTORY. 

or  king-sons  of  Kush.  These  lands  were  thickly  in- 
habited by  black  and  brown  populations.  In  the 
same  way,  the  Hebrews  (or  Beni-Israel)  used  the  de- 
nominations Cush  and  Cushites  in  a  generic  sense  for 
lands  and  tribes  situated  south  of  them;  and  the  term 
expanded  with  the  peregrinations,  forced  or  voluntary, 
of  the  Arabs  and  Jews.  First  it  was  applied  to  lands 
and  tribes  south  of  Mesopotamia  (Xaharaina),  the 
birthplace  of  Heber  (Taber)  and  the  Beni-Israel ; 
and  when  they  were  in  Egypt,  either  as  free  or  cap- 
tive Hycksos,  they  applied  the  term  Gush  to  the  region 
of  Meroe  south  of  the  Nile  ;  and  (according  to  Jewish 
writers)  Sabaa,  in  southern  Arabia,  was  also  inhabited 
by  sons  of  Cush.  It  would  be  difficult  to  determine 
to  which  language  the  word  primarily  belongs,  but, 
in  all  probability,  early  Shemitic  writers  transmitted 
it  to  the  ancient  Armenians,  just  as  they  in  turn  trans- 
mitted it  to  western  or  Christian  writers.  Herodotus 
used  it;  and  his  Kissia  is  identical  with  that  of  the 
Hebrews%and  Armenians.  The  denomination  Chute, 
Chuzi,  Cossaia,  Cussaia,  of  various  dialects  of  Fore- 
Asia  has  reference  to  the  tribes  of  Kuschani,  Kusi, 
Cushites.  Hence  Cushites  are  to  be  found  in  Syria, 
Arabia  and  Africa. 

In  the  phonetic  character  is  found  the  expression 
M-S-R  as  a  designation  for  that  land.  It  is  synony- 
mous with  the  Arabic  Misi\  the  Jewish  Mizraim, 
Mazor,  and  the  Syriac  Mezren.  Various  explanations 
are  given  of  this  word,  according  to  the  significations 
it  has  in  the  various  dialects.  According  to  some  it 


EGYPTIAN? .  9 

means  "  stronghold,"  while  according  to  others,  it  sig- 
nifies "extension  ;"  by  the  Hebrews  it  was  applied  to 
Egypt,  or,  as  some  commentators  assert,  to  the  Egyp- 
tians. 

Other  appellations  for  the  land  of  Egypt  are  found 
in  the  hieroglyphs  and  in  phonetic  groups.  This  ia 
the  case,  for  instance,  with  the  group  Nelii,  signifying 
the  sycamore,  which  is  believed  to  be  indigenous  in 
Eygpt. 

None  of  these  names,  however,  had  any  historical 
signification,  so  that  it  still  remains  a  mystery  what 
the  native  name  for  the  primitive  civilizers  of  the  Nile 
valley  was.  As  for  the  name  Egypt,  Egyptians,  this 
was  bestowed  on  them  by  the  Greeks ;  and  some  at- 
tempt to  deduce  it  from  PJitlia  or  Ptali,  a  divinity  of 
the  city  and  township  of  Memphis  ;  and  the  denom- 
ination, Land  of  Ptali,  is  supposed  to  have  been 
used  in  a  generic  sense. 

The  advantage  of  thus  exploring  those  historical 
and  philological  labyrinths  will  make  itself  clear  in 
succeeding  chapters.  Philology  has  explained  the 
signification  of  various  other  ancient  ethnic  and  na- 
tional names,  among  others,  "  Hebrews,"  u  Aryas"  or 
"  Aryans,"  "  Pelasgi,"  "Greeks,"  "  Canaanites,"  etc., 
and  such  explanations  have  frequently  proved  of  the 
highest  value  in  letting  us  into  the  secret  of  their 
origin,  character,  and  the  direction  of  their  activity. 
But  there  is  no  vestige  of  the  antique  language  of  the 
Egyptians  that  would  lead  us  to  suppose  that  absolute 
distinctions  of  race,  or  chattelhood  based  thereon, 
1* 


10  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

formed  features   of  the  primitive   life  in   the 
valley. 

From  various  paintings,  inscriptions,  and  philolog- 
ical data,  science  has  endeavored  to  reconstruct  the 
ethnological  conceptions  entertained  by  the  Egyptians 
seventeen  centuries  B.  c.  The  red  race  occupied 
Egypt  (chiefly  lower  Egypt),  Arabia,  and  part  of 
Babylonia;  the  yellow  race  was  spread  over  Palestine 
and  Syria,  reaching  Africa  ;  the  white  race  stretched 
north  and  north-west  of  Egypt,  inhabiting  a  part  of 
Libya  and  the  islands  of  Rhodes,  Cyprus,  Crete,  etc. ; 
the  Hack  and  brown  race  occupied  Egypt,  Abyssinia, 
Nubia,  and  Southern  Arabia.  Nah  es.  u  or  Nah.si.  u 
was  the  name  given  to  all  negroes  or  blacks  who  were 
not  Egyptians,  while  to  the  whole  red-colored  race 
they  applied  the  term  ret,  ret-u,  signifying  "  germ-." 

The  Egyptian  pantheon  was  of  course  the  creation 
of  the  superior  priests.  It  made  each  human  race  the 
creation  of  a  separate  god  ;  and  very  probably  all  the 
numerous  elements  in  the  complicated  social  structure 
of  the  Egyptians,  that  is,  every  caste  or  function,  even 
the  lowest,  which  was  still  an  integral  part  of  the  whole, 
had  each  its  separate  deity.  The  creator  of  the  black 
race  was  either  a  god  represented  symbolically  by  a 
blackbird,  or  the  god  H'OR  (or  Horos),  son  of  Osiris, 
and  his  avenger,  who  dwelt  in  the  firmament  with  all 
the  other  deities. 

The  negro  physiognomy  appears  on  the  Egyptian 
monuments;  and -this  not  only  in  the  representa- 
tions of  common  persons,  but  even  in  the  case  of 


EGYPTIANS.  11 

kings,  as,  for  instance,  those  of  the  eighteenth  and 
nineteenth  dynasties,  in  the  statues  of  TotmesIII.  and 
Amenophis  III.  The  Egyptian  king  Sabakos  was 
an  Ethiopian  by  birth,  and  many  other  Pharaohs 
married  black  African  princesses — Nah  es.  u.  There 
can  be  no  donbt  of  intermarriages  having  been  com- 
mon between  red  and  ~black  Egyptians  proper ;  and 
through  such  unions,  legal  and  illegal,  it  was  that  the 
brownish  rather  than  entirely  black  color  of  the  Egyp- 
tian man  of  the  people,  as  represented  on  the  monu- 
ments, was  produced.  (A  similar  slow  but  uninter- 
rupted transition  and  modification  may  be  verified  at 
the  present  day  and  under  our  own  eyes — crisped  hair, 
thick  skulls,*  still  prevailing).  Finally,  eunuchs  are 
represented  of  a  yellowish  hue,  perhaps  nearer  in  tint 
to  that  of  the  yellow  than  the  black  race. 

Some  psychologic  ethnologists  affirm  that  the  Afri- 
can or  pure  negro  is  to  be  considered  as  constituting 
a  passive  race,  requiring  fecundation  by  an  active 
one.  If  this  be  the  case,  then  the  Egyptians  solved 
the  question.  The  red  and  dominant  race  drew  no 
impassable  lines  of  demarcation  by  chattelhood  ;  and 
the  black  population  formed  the  most  vital  element 
of  the  social  structure. 

At  the  threshold  of  what  our  limited  knowledge 
considers  as  positive  history,  therefore,  we  meet  a 
highly  developed  society  and  nation,  which  for  long 
centuries  enjoyed  a  political  existence,  normal  when 

*  Herodotus, 


ll>  SLAVERY    IN   HISTORY. 

compared  with  contemporaneous  and  surrounding 
nations,  and  domestic  slavery  neither  lay  at  the 
"basis  of  the  structure,  nor  formed  an  integral  ele- 
ment of  Egyptian  life.  In  the  monuments,  paint- 
ings, and  inscriptions  which  remain  as  records  and 
reminiscences  of  Egypt's  palmy  ages,  no  traces  are 
found  in  the  regular  national  and  domestic  economy, 
of  agricultural  or  industrial  labor  which  could  have 
been  performed  by  slaves  or  chattels.  Slaves  and 
slavery  existed  in  Egypt,  not  as  an  intrinsic  and  in- 
tegral part  of  society,  but  as  an  unhealthy  excrescence 
— not  under  the  sanction  of  right  or  law,  but  as  the 
result  of  a  violation  of  both.  Egyptian  slavery  was 
an  atonement  for  social  and  personal  crime — an  abnor- 
mal monstrosity,  and  not  the  normal  and  vital  force 
of  Egyptian  activity.  If  slavery  had  been  a  normal 
social  institution,  it  would  have  had  its  deity  and  its 
rites ;  but,  as  exclusively  the  result  of  a  disease,  it 
was  regulated  arid  dealt  with  as  such. 

Egyptian  slaves  consisted  of  prisoners  of  war  made 
on  the  field  of  battle,  or  captives  taken  in  forays 
made  into  neighboring  or  distant  countries.  In  early 
times,  also,  all  strangers  whom  accident  or  tempest 
threw  on  the  shores  of  Egypt,  and  who  had  no 
claims  to  a  legal  hospitality,  were  enslaved ;  for,  for 
centuries  Egypt  was  closed  against  the  intrusion  of 
foreigners — certain  merchants  and  traffickers  only 
being  specially  excepted.  Furthermore,  conquered 
countries  paid  their  tribute  partly  in  children,  who 
thus,  became  slaves.  All  these  slaves  were  the 


EGYPTIANS.  18 

property  of  the  Pharaohs,  who  employed  them  in 
various  ways,  distributed  them  to  their  officials,  sold 
them  to  their  subjects  of  all  castes,  or  to  domestic 
and  foreign  traffickers.  But  the  exportation  of  slaves 
belongs  to  a  later  period — the  epoch  of  Egypt's  his- 
torical decay.  Slaves  were  imported,  but  not  exported, 
as  there  was  no  special  economical  slave-breeding  for 
this  or  other  purposes. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  dwell  on  the  generally  known 
fact  of  the  captivity  and  enslavement  of  the  Jews, 
or  to  detail  the  researches  concerning  the  Hycksos — 
first  slaves,  then  masters  and  rulers,  and  finally  again 
overpowered  and  reduced  to  captivity.  But  beside 
these  Shemites,  Hebrews — be  they  Hycksos  or  not — all 
other  races  and  nations  were  at  some  time  or  other 
captives  and  slaves  in  Egypt.  The  Pharaohs  warred 
with  Asiatics,  and  especially  with  what  is  now  called 
Caucasian  races  ;  and  the  monuments  show  that  red, 
white,  and  yellow  slaves  taken  in  war  were  far  more 
numerous  than  the  blacks. 

Egyptians  condemned  for  any  kind  of  criminal  of- 
fence became  slaves,  or  were  condemned  to  public 
hard  labor.  As  equality  before  the  law  prevailed  in 
Egypt,  a  person  belonging  to  the  superior  caste  (red- 
skin) was  liable  thus  to  become  a  slave  in  his  own 
country.  Contrary,  however',  to  the  custom  of  almost 
the  whole  of  antiquity,  and  even  of  earlier  Christian 
times,  the  Egyptians  never  reduced  debtors  to  per- 
sonal slavery.  A  debtor  was  not  personally  responsi- 
ble, and  could  not  be  sold  into  slavery  by  his  creditor. 


14  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

Slaves  of  every  kind  might  be  redeemed  and  manu- 
mitted. They  then  became  equal  to  other  Egyptians, 
as  is  evidenced  by  the  marriage  of  Joseph  with  a 
daughter  of  a  high-priest,  and  by  his  eminent  official 
position.  Children  born  from  Egyptians  and  their 
slave  women,  whether  red,  yellow,  black  or  white, 
were  equal  in  all  rights,  and  shared  the  inheritance 
with  the  legitimate  oifspring  of  the  same  father.  The 
father  transmitted  his  own  status  to  his  children,  ac- 
cording to  a  custom  general  in  the  East,  and  ascend- 
ing to  the  remotest  antiquity. 

Slaves  worked  in  the  mines,  and  were  employed,  on 
every  kind  of  hard  labor,  but  principally,  and  as  far 
as  possible,  on  those  great  and  almost  indestructible 
public  works  and  monuments  that  distinguished  the 
cities  of  the  Nile.  It  was  the  .pride  of  the  Pharaohs 
to  be  enabled  to  inscribe  on  the  structure  that  the 
work  was  not  performed  by  the  hands  of  Egyptians — 
referring  to  the  hard  work,  such  as  carrying  blocks, 
raising  and  preparing  material,  digging  canals,  etc. 
All  the  servants  aboiffrthe  palace,  sanctuary  and  villa 
were  slaves.  They  belonged  to  all  races  and  colors, 
and  as  such  are  represented  on  the  monuments.  In 
ancient,  independent  Egypt,  therefore,  slavery  was,  in 
the  strictest  sense,  limited  to  the  household. 

Such  was  Egypt,  the  most  ancient  of  nations  and 
civilizations.  In  her,  slavery  was  an  incidental  and 
abnormal  condition,  and  did  not  enter  into  the  vitals 
of  society  during  the  long  centuries  that  this  society 
stood  foremost  among  nations  and  civilizations.  In 


EGYPTIANS.  15 

the  last  stages  of  Egyptian  history,  however,  domes- 
tic slavery  did  its  terrible  work,  helped  by  conquests 
by  foreigners,  by  the  overthrow  of  its  independence,  by 
exactions,  tributes,  and  all  kinds  of  oppressions.  Then 
only  was  it  that  political  slavery,  or  what  is  called 
oriental  despotism,  became  altogether  fused  with  do- 
mestic slavery. 

Various  are  the  causes  to  which  the  decomposition 
and  downfall  of  Egypt  are  ascribed.  Some  assert 
that  Egyptian  society  and  civilization,  traversing  all 
the  stages  of  growth  and  development,  logically  end- 
ed in  senility.)  decrepitude  and  death.  Others  find 
in  the  division  into  castes,  one  of  the  pre-eminent 
causes  of  the  decline  of  Egypt.  But,  baneful  and 
destructive  as  is  the  organization  into  castes,  it  is 
a  blessing  when  compared  with  domestic  slavery. 
The  rigid  organization  of  the  castes  was  a  counter- 
poison,  a  check  imposed  upon  the  extension  of  do 
mestic  slavery,  preventing  it  from  eating  up  the 
healthy  agencies  of  society.  The  caste  system — and 
above  all  priestly  caste — was,  to'  a  great  extent,  a  curb 
on  the  despotism  of  the  Pharaohs.  The  castes  for 
many  centuries  prevented  the  fusion  of  the  two  great- 
est social  plagues  :  domestic  and  political  slavery. 

The  all-powerful  law  of  analogies — which  in  the 
course  of  these  pages  will  be  more  luminously  exhibited 
from  the  fate  of  other  empires  and  civilizations — au- 
thorizes already  the  positive,  and  even  axiomatic  as- 
sertion, that  the  almost  unparalleled  by  long  historical 
life  of  the  Egyptians,  and  the  highly  advanced  state 


16  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

of  their  civilization,  are  due  exclusively  to  the  fact, 
that  domestic  slavery  and  chattelhood  remained  for  a 
long  time  an  abnormal  outgrowth.  It  was  not  the  basis 
of  domestic  and  national  economy,  not  the  object  fit 
for  the  special  care  of  the  legislator,  and  was  not  inter- 
twined with  the  social,  political  and  intellectual  life 
of  the  Egyptians. 


PHCENICANS.  17 

II. 

PHOENICIANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Moevers,  Kenan,  Duncker,  Ewald,  Ezekiel,  Proverbs  of  Solomon,  etc. 

PREVIOUS  to  any  epoch  settled  by  positive  history, 
the  Canaanites,  or  Phoenicians, a  highly  civilized  na- 
tion, dwelt  in  the  land  called  Palestine.  They  were 
an  elderly  branch  of  the  Shemitic  family ;  their 
generic  name  embracing  the  Hittites,  Jebusites, 
Amorites,  and  Girgasites — all  of  whom  the  Greeks 
called  Phoenicians.  Canaan,  in  the  Shemitic  dia- 
lects, signifies  "  lowland,"  as  was  Palestine,  in  contra- 
distinction to  Aram,  or  the  highlands  of  Mesopotamia 
(Naharajim,  Nahirim  of  the  Old  Testament).  Ca- 
naan, in  Hebrew  proper,  is  sometimes  synonymous 
with  "  merchant ;"  and  the  historical  development  of 
the  Phoenicians  explains  and  justifies  this  significa- 
tion. The  Greek  name  Phoenicians,  is  supposed  by 
some  to  be  derived  from phoinizai,  "to  kill,"  whence 
Phoinikes  (Phoenicians),  "  bloody  men."  The  Phoe- 
nicians, being  very  jealous  of  their  maritime  trade, 
killed  and  in  every  way  molested  the  navigators  from 
other  lands  who  dared  to  follow  their  vessels  or  spy 
out  their  extensive  maritime  establishments,  factories, 
or  connections.  For  this  reason  the  Greeks  long  con- 
sidered the  Tyrrenian  seas  as  highly  dangerous  for 


18  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

navigators,  and  as  filled  with  rocks,  monsters,  and  an- 
thropophagi. Other  investigators,  again,  derive  the 
Greek  word  Phoenicians  from  their  ruddy  complexion, 
or  from  their  having  first  navigated  the  Red  Sea. 

The  primitive  seats  of  the  Phoenicians  lay  north 
and  south  of  Syria.  From  thence  they  are  supposed 
to  have  emigrated  to  Palestine  through  the  northern 
part  of  Syria,  while  another  column  from  the  south 
advanced  from  the  delta  on  the  Persian  Gulf,  anciently 
called  Assyrium  Stagnum,  or  from  the  islands  of  Ty- 
ros (Tylos)  and  Arados,  situated  in  the  above-named 
waters.  Some  writers  suppose  that  an  earthquake 
obliged  them  to  emigrate  from  these  shores  of  the 
Erythrean  or  Red  Sea  (Persian  Gulf)  of  antiquity, 
and  that  their  Greek  name  owes  its  origin  to  this  cir- 
cumstance. 

These  wanderings  through  regions  already  thickly 
inhabited  by  various  tribes  and  nations,  may  have 
contributed  to  develop  in  these  Shemites  that  power- 
ful mercantile  propensity  to  which  they  chiefly  owe 
their  historical  immortality ;  then  and  there,  too,  they 
most  probably  began  the  traffic  in  slaves,  to  which,  if 
they  were  not  its  originators,  they  certainly  gave  a 
new  and  powerful  impulse.  Thus,  wThile  the  Phoeni- 
cians figure  in  history  as  the  earliest  navigators  and 
merchants,  they  must  also  be  written  down  in  the 
light  of  having  inaugurated,  or  at  least,  greatly  ex- 
tended the  accursed  slave-trade. 

No  division  into  castes  seems  ever  to  have  existed 
among  the  Phoenicians.  As  a  general  rule,  no  traces 


PHOENICIANS.  19 

of  this  social  circumscription  are  to  be  detected  among 
the  nations  of  pure  or  even  of  mixed  Shemitic  stock 
which  flourished  in  Fore-Asia — in  Syria,  Babylon  or 
Assyria.  The  Phoenician  political  organism  embraced  '' 
Itt,  the  powerful  ruling  families ;  and  2dly,  the  sub- 
ject classes — a  division  similar  to  that  of  the  aristos 
and  demos  which  prevailed  in  Greece,  or  to  the  pa- 
tricians and  plebeians  of  Home.  The  land  of  Canaan 
was  originally  cultivated  by  freeholders  and  yeomen. 
When  one  tribe  subdued  another,  or  when  the  victors 
settled  among  the  vanquished,  the  latter  were  not  en- 
slaved ;  they  became  a  kind  of  tribute-paying  colo- 
nists, with  limited  political  privileges,  but  with  full 
civil  rights.  They  were  at  liberty  to  hold  real  and 
personal  property  of  every  kind,  just  as  much  as  the 
ruling  tribe  or  class.  So  also  it  was  among  all  the 
Shemites,  and,  with  but  few  exceptions,  among  all  the 
nations  of  antiquity. 

Slaves,  at  this  period,  were  employed  only  at  hard 
labor  in  the  cities  and  in  the  household ;  they  were 
as  yet  neither  farmers,  field-laborers,  nor  mechanics. 
But,  as  already  mentioned,  the  Phoenicians  were  the 
great  slave-traders,  carriers  and  factors  in  the  remotest 
antiquity,  and  this  both  by  land  anct  sea.  At  a  period 
of  more  than  fourteen  centuries  B.  c.,  the  Phoenicians 
covered  all  the  shores  around  the  Egean  and  Mediter- 
ranean seas  with  their  factories,  strongholds  and  colo- 
nial cities.  Besides  this,  they  stretched  out  even  to 
the  Euxine,  while  their  colonies  studded,  also,  the 
Corinthian  and  Ionian  gulfs  (on  the  sites  of  mod- 


20  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

ern  Fatras  and  Lepanto),  and  extended  on  the  Atlan- 
tic coast  even  beyond  Gibraltar.  The  records  of  the 
earliest  wanderings  of  these  Canaan itish  tribes  into 
Africa,  and  even  Greece,  are  preserved  in  legends  as 
the  migrations  of  gods,  demigods  and  heroes. 

Thus  the  Phoenicians  linked  in  a  vast  commercial 
chain  Britain,  Iberia  (Spain),  and  India ;  while  the 
Guadalquiver,  the  Nile,  the  Euphrates,  the  Tigris  and 
the  Indus,  served  as  highways  for  their  trading  enter- 
prise. From  Byblos,  Tyre,  Sidon  and  other  empori- 
ums, they  sent  out  caravans  far  and  wide  into  Arabia 
and  Fore-Asia.  The  products  of  their  art  and  indus- 
try were  reputed  most  exquisite  even  as  early  as  the 
epoch  of  the  Iliad,  and  they  were  vain  enough  to  look 
on  themselves  as  the  pivots  of  the  world's  prosperity, 
and  the  Scriptures  repeatedly  mention  the  pride  and  de- 
i  nounce  the  vices  of  the  Phoenician  cities.  What  their 
merchants  bought  or  received  in  barter  in  Asia  or  in 
Egypt,  they  exchanged  for  the  rough  products  of 
Greece,  Spain,  Albion,  Libya,  and  the  lands  on  the 
Euxine :  these  consisted  principally  of  grains,  hides, 
copper,  tin,  silver,  gold,  and  indeed  all  kinds  of  mar- 
ketable objects.  Their  central  situation  for  the  com- 
merce of  the  known  and  almost  of  the  unknown  world, 
especially  favored  the  slave-trade.  Accordingly  Phoe- 
nician slaves  became  more  and  more  valuable,  and  a 
continually  extending  market  produced  a  constantly 
increasing  demand.  In  all  probability  the  inland  car- 
avan excursions  afforded  the  principal  supplies  for 
their  immense  slave  traffic;  but  they  also  bought, 


PHOENICIANS.  21 

stole,  and  kidnapped  from  every  possible  place  and 
by  every  conceivable  stratagem — -just  as  modern 
American  slave-traders  do.  In  this  horrid  industry 
they  visited  every  shore.  They  carried  it  on  among 
the  Greeks,  among  the  Barbarians*  of  the  Hellespont 
and  the  Pontus,  among  the  Iberians,  Italians,  Moors 
and  other  Africans.  Natives  of  Asia  were  sold  to 
Greece  and  other  European  countries,  while  Syria  and 
Egypt  were  furnished  with  European  slaves.  The 
great  majority  of  these  slaves  belonged  to  what  is 
called  the  Caucasian  race,  and  negroes  constituted  a 
comparatively  insignificant  part.  In  return  for  these 
white  chattels  the  Phcenicians  bartered  the  products 
of  Egypt  and  of  Fore-Asia. 

The  Phcenicians,  then,  were  the  great,  and,  in  all 
probability,  the  exclusive  slave-traders  of  those  times. 
The  traffic  had  its  chief  centre  in  Byblos,  Sidon  and 
Tyre — the  depots,  bazaars,  and  storehouses  of  which 
were  always  glutted  with  human  merchandise. 

In  times  positively  historical,  when  Phoenicia  had 
come  to  be  the  mighty  and  flourishing  emporium  of 
the  world's  trade,  foreign  slaves  constituted  the  im- 
mense majority  of  the  population  of  her  cities — as  in- 
deed was  the  case  with  most  of  the  commercial  cities 
of  antiquity;  but  none  of  them  were  so  crowded 
with  slaves  as  were  Byblos,  Tyre,  and  Sidon.  In 
consequence  of  this  agglomeration,  slavery  gradu- 
ally crept  from  the  market  and  the  household  into 
general  industry  and  agriculture.  The  slaves  thus 
employed  by  the  Phoenicians  may  be  classified  as  fol- 


22  SLAVEKY   IN   HISTORY. 

w 

lows :  1.  Slaves  of  luxury,  living  in  the  house  of  the 
master;  2.  Slaves  employed  in  various  branches  of 
manufacture,  as  weavers,  dyers,  and  artisans  of  all  kinds 
— as  also  in  the  manual  labors  common  to  every  mari 
time  and  commercial  city  ;  3.  Agricultural  slaves. 

This  vast  accumulation  of  slaves  begat  repeated  and 
bloody  revolts  during  the  whole  historic  existence  of 
Phoenicia.  The  scanty  and  comparatively  insignifi- 
cant fragments  of  her  history  which  now  exist  are 
filled  with  accounts  of  such  revolts,  generally  ending 
as  most  fearful  tragedies.  An  uprising  of  this  kind 
occurred  in  Tyre  about  ten  centuries  B.  c. ;  and  his- 
tory records,  that  at  that  time  the  king,  the  aristocracy, 
all  the  masters,  and  even  great  numbers  of  non-slave- 
holding  freemen  were  slaughtered.  The  women,  how- 
ever, were  saved  and  married  by  .the  slaves;  and  thus 
many  primitive  oligarchic  families  entirely  disap- 
peared. Frequent  servile  revolts  and  insurrections 
of  this  kind  resulted  aj  length  in  the  partial  eman- 
cipation of  the  slaves  and  their  conquest  of  certain 
civil  rights. 

In  keeping  with  the  almost  boundless  accumulation  of 
wealth  in  those  cities  was  the  increase  in  the  number  of 
slaves.  As  a  consequence,  the  free  laborers,  artisans,  and 
farmers  became  impoverished  and  dispossessed  ;  and,  as 
was  natural,  they  often  joined  the  insurgent  bondmen. 
The  oligarchs  also  sent  out  these  poor  freemen  wher- 
ever Phoanician  ships  could  carry  them,  or  wherever 
there  was  a  chance  of  establishing  factories,  cities,  or 
colonies.  Such  was  the  common  origin  of  those  priini- 


PHCENICIANS.  23 

live  Phoenician  settlements,  which  were  scattered 
north  and  west  on  almost  every  shore.  In  most  re- 
gions, even  in  Libya,  their  object  was  simply  com- 
mercial and  not  4pl  °f  a  conquering  character.  At 
any  rate  the  new  comers  soon  intermarried  and  mixed 
with  the  natives. 

The  slaveholding  rulers  were  now  forced  to  sustain 
a  hired  soldiery  to  keep  down  the  slaves — not  for  de- 
fence against  an  external  but  an  internal  foe.  Among 
these  hirelings  were  the  Carry ians,  Lydians,  Libyans, 
and  Libyo-Phcenicians.  To  such  motley  mercenaries 
were  they  obliged  to  intrust  the  security  of  their 
homes  and  municipalities.  At  times  this  "hireling  sol- 
diery joined  the  revolted  slaves,  and  they  formed  but 
a  poor  defence  against  the  Egyptians,  or  against 
Assyrian,  Babylonian,  Persian,  and  Alexandrian 
conquest.  To  all  these  empires  the  Phoenician  slave- 
holders were  obliged  to  pay  tribute,  until  finally 
Alexander  massacred  or  enslaved  them  all — slave- 
holders and  slaves  alike. 

Already  some  of  the  violent  pro-slavery  militants 
in  the  slave  section  of  the  United  States  express  their 
purpose  to  invoke  the  aid  of  France  in  their  schemes 
of  secession  and  conquest,  and  propose  that  their 
cities  and  states  be  occupied  by  French  garrisons. 
What  a  striking  analogy  with  the  course  of  the  fated 
Phoenicians !  And  if  eventually  France  should  listen 
to  their  humble  prayer  and  send  defenders  to  these 
terrified  slave-masters,  climatic  reasons  would  induce 
her  to  furnish  such  troops  as  are  naturally  fitted  to 


24:  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

bear  tlie  tropical  heats  of  the  slave-coast — the  malari- 
ous regions  of  Louisiana  and  South  Carolina.  Such 
would  be  her  Zouaves  and  Turcos — the  Zouaves  ene- 
mies of  every  kind  of  slavery,  an<^^e  Turcos  negroes 
themselves.  Where  then  would  be  their  defenders 
and  their  security?  Every  French  soldier,  even  if 
neither  Zouave  nor  Turco,  would,  in  all  probability, 
side  at  once  with  the  oppressed  against  the  oppressor. 
The  prejudice  of  race,  so  prevalent  in  America,  is  not 
a  European  characteristic  :  it  did  not  exist  in  antiquity ; 
it  does  not  prevail  in  Europe  now. 

It  was,  not  the  existence  of  an  oriental  political 
despotism  in  Phoenicia — it  was  domestic  slavery ',  which, 
penetrating  into  industry  and  agriculture,  destroyed 
the  richest,  most  enterprising,  and  most  daring  com- 
munity of  remote  antiquity.  Cicero  wrote  their  epi- 
taph: "  Fallacissimum  esse  genus  Phoznicum,  omnia 
monumenta  vetustatis  atque  omnes  historia  nobis pro- 
diderunt" 

When,  therefore,  positive  history  slowly  rises  on  the 
limitless  horizon  of  time,  Phoenicia  appears  as  an 
ominous  illustration  of  how  domestic  slavery,  from  an 
external  social  monstrosity,  tends  to  become  a  chronic 
but  corrosive  disease.  And  neither  does  the  evidence 
of  history  end  with  her.  Over  and  over  again  will 
it  be  found  that  slavery,  after  eating  so  deeply  into 
the  social  organism  as  to  become  constitutional  and 
chronic,  has  the  same  ultimate  issue,  even  as  a  virus 
slowly  but  surely  penetrates  from  the  extremities  into 
the  vitals  of  the  animal  organism. 


PHCENICIANS.  25 

The  intermediate  stages  of  such  diseases  and  the 
process  of  the  symptoms  are  often  modified  in  their 
outward  manifestations  to  such  an  extent  as  to  lead 
even  the  keen  observer  astray.  But  it  is  only  he  who 
can  unerringly  diagnosticate  the  nature  of  the  dis- 
ease who  can  ever  become  a  great  healer :  he  discovers 
the  true  character  and  source  of  the  malady,  whatever 
may  be  its  external  complications,  and  from  whatever 
conditions  and  influences  they  may  result.  Some 
symptoms  may  increase,  others  decrease  in  intensity 
and  virulence  in  the  physiological  as  in  the  social 
disease — they  are,  however,  secondary.  The  parallel 
holds  good — the  principle  remaining  unchanged  :  life 
becomes  extinct  for  similar  reasons  in  the  animal  as 
in  the  social  and  political  body. 

Thus,  in  the  history  of  the  Phoenicians,  and  there- 
fore, in  the  earliest  authentic  epoch,  a  great  historical 
and  social  law  manifests  itself  in  full  action.  This 
activity  it  retains  through  all  the  subsequent  social 
and  political  catastrophes  in  the  life  of  nations  and 
empires,  down  even  to  Hayti  with  her  immortal  Tous- 
saint.  Slavery  generates  bloody  struggles.  Many  of 
these  have  resulted  in  the  slaves  violently  regaining 
their  liberty,  while  others  have  destroyed  the  whole 
state — swallowing  up  the  slaveholders  in  their  own 
blood,  or  burying  them  under  the  ruins  of  their  own 
social  edifice. 
2 


LIBYANS.  27 

III. 

LIBYANS. 

AUTHORITIES  : 

Diodorus  Siculus,  Cor-rippus,  Movers,  etc. 

THE  primitive  social  and  intellectual  condition  of 
the  populations  dwelling  along  the  shores  of  Africa 
washed  by  the  Mediterranean  sea,  can  only  be  inferred 
from  their  respective  relations  with  the  Phoenicians 
and  Carthaginians.  Other  sources  of  historical  infor- 
mation as  to  that  remote  period  there  are  none,  while 
later  times  also  give  comparatively  scanty  satisfaction. 

Ethnology  has  not  yet  positively  determined  who 
the  aborigines  of  Libya  were,  and  it  is  questionable 
if  it  can  ever  be  satisfactorily  settled.  Egyptian  in- 
scriptions indicate  a  white  race  in  the  north-eastern 
corner  of  Libya,  adjoining  Egypt;  while  further  to 
the  west  lived  the  blacks.  At  a  period  exceedingly 
remote,  the  whites  mixed  with  these  negro  blacks, 
who  probably  immigrated  from  the  centre  of  Africa — 
Soudan — and  spread  over  the  whole  of  Libya.  These 
remote  epochs,  however,  altogether  refuse  chronolog- 
•ical  limitation.  But  when  chronology,  even  of  the 
most  rudimentary  kind,  becomes  possible,  history 
shows  us  the  existence,  in  Libya,  of  a  nomadic  and 
agricultural  people,  who  can  be  no  other  than  these 
cross-breeds,  and  who  had  brought  a  part  of  the  land 
to  a  high  degree  of  cultivation.  The  Libyans  may 


28  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

thus  be  considered  as  an  autochthonous  African  pop- 
ulation— a  theory  which  is  confirmed  by  other  evi- 
dence not  now  necessary  to  give. 

Among  these  Libyans — called  by  the  Greeks  Afri, 
and  by  the  Komans,  Africani — agriculture  was  in  a 
highly  flourishing  condition  at  the  epoch  of  the  earli- 
est myths  and  legends  of  Greece:  all  the  Hellenic 
legends  relating  to  the  distant  sea-wanderings  of  gods 
or  heroes,  carry  them  to  the  Libyan  shores  about  the 
Regio  Syrtica — Tripolis.  Among  these  are  the  Ar- 
gonauts and  Heraklides,  Perseus,  Kadmos,  Odysseus, 
and  Menalaos.  So  the  Greek  myths  of  Atlas  and  the 
Garden  of  the  Hesperides  have  their  spring  and  source 
in  that  part  of  Libya.  All  this  presupposes  a  very 
old  culture.  Herodotus  says  that  the  ^Egis  of  the 
Greek  Pallas  originated  in  Libya,  as  also  that  Athene 
here  received  Gorgona's  head  for  her  ^Egis.  Even  at 
the  present  day,  the  chiefs  of  some  of  the  tribes  in 
the  southern  part  of  ancient  Libya  carry  the  skins  of 
leopards  and  other  wild  beasts  on  their  shoulders  in 
such  a  way  that  the  head  of  the  animal,  ^Egis-like, 
covers  their  breast.  The  adventurous  Phoenician  and 
Greek  navigators  of  the  earliest  period  accordingly 
found  the  Libyans  already  a  highly  cultivated  people. 
This  culture,  too,  they  possessed  previous  to  their  in- 
tercourse with  the  Canaanites,  Phoenicians,  or  Greeks 
— anterior  even  to  the  wanderings  of  Astarte,  Anna, 
or  Dido. 

At  this  epoch  the  Libyans  were  possessed  of  writ- 
ten language.  Their  alphabet  was,  in  certain  peculi- 


LIBYANS.  29 

arities,  of  an  older  type  than  even  the  Phoenician — 
that  father  of  so  ..many  eastern  and  western  alphabets. 
Leptis  and  Oka  are  Libyan  names  for  Libyan  cities 
which  were  in  existence  previous  to  any  Phoenician 
colonizations — though  these  colonizations  are  them- 
selves anterior  to  positive  history. 

Goats,  sheep,  and  other  domestic  animals  were  in- 
troduced into  Greece  and  Italy  from  Libya;  and 
from  thence  also  came  the  knowledge  of  how  to  breed 
and  rear  them.  The  Libyans  also,  in  all  probability, 
first  taught  them  the  mode  of  keeping  and  rearing 
bees,  as  the  Greek  word  for  "  wax,"  keros  — Latin, 
cera,  is  by  some  deduced  from  the  Berber  (Libyan) 
ta-kir,  and  the  Greek  designation  for  honey,  meli,  mel 
— Latin,  mel,  from  the  Berber  ta-men-t.  Others,  how- 
ever, trace  both  those  words  to  a  Sanscrit  root. 

As  an  evidence  of  their  advanced  civilization,  it 
may  be  mentioned  that  the  Libyans  were  highly  ac- 
complished in  horticulture  at  a  time  when  the  fields 
of  Greece  and  Italy  were  only  rudely  ploughed. 
From  Libya  across  the  Mediterranean,  the  legumi- 
nous or  pulse  plants  seem  to  have  been  introduced 
into  Southern  Europe,  together  with  the  mode  of  their 
use  and  culture  ;  and  some  investigators  consider  that 
the  Latin  names  for  "pease"  (deer),  for  "lentils" 
(lens,  lentis),  and  for  "  beans"  (jfaba),  have  their  origin 
ia  the  Berber  ikiker,  ta-linit,  andfabua.  But  to  these 
words,  also,  others  give  a  Sanscrit  origin.  Cucurbis 
"cucumber,"  is  in  Berber  curumb — although,  again, 
it  is  traced,  but  forcedly,  to  the  Sanscrit.  Whatever 


30  SLAVERY  IN   HISTORY. 

may  be  the  origin  of  the  words,  it  is  an  historical  fact 
that  the  Romans  acquired  their  whole  knowledge  of 
horticulture  from  the  Libyans  and  Libyo-Pliceni- 
cians ;  and  it  may  even  be  surmised  that  the  Latin 
wtuSj  "  hortus,"  had  its  root  in  the  Berber  urt. 

Civilization  among  the  Libyans,  therefore,  was  an- 
terior to  any  contact  either  with  Phoenicians  or 
Greeks,  and  long  centuries  anterior  to  the  Cartha- 
ginian domination  over  the  northern  shores  of  Africa. 

The  Libyans  were  a  nation  of  agriculturists  and 
freeholders.  JSTo  trace  of  slavery  appears  among  them, 
and,  if  it  existed  at  all,  was  altogether  insignificant 
and  accidental.  When  the  Phoenicians  and  Canaan- 
itish  settlements  increased  in  power  and  number,  the 
Libyans  became  tributary  colonists,  and  the  Phoeni- 
cians instituted  the  slave-trade  among  them,  whose 
victims  were  confined  mostly  to  the  nomads. 

As  we  have  before  said,  the  poor  white  colonists 
sent  from  Canaan  and  Phoenicia  to  Libya  inter- 
married with  the  natives  ;  and  from  this  union 
came  the  Libyo-Phoenicians  of  history.  The  rela- 
tions which  the  Libyans  (and  subsequently  the 
Libyo-Phoenicians,  when  again  subjugated)  held  to 
Phoenician  and  Canaanitish  settlers,  were  similar  to 
those  which  free  Komans  afterward  held  to  the  Lon- 
gobard  and  Frankish  conquerors  who  settled  upon  and 
held  the  lands  of  which  they  were  once  the  masters. 


CARTHAGINIANS.  81 

IY. 
CARTHAGINIANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  Polybius,  Corrippus,  Mcevers,  etc. 

THE  Carthaginians  were  the  great  ethnic  offshoots 
of  Phoenicia  in  the  western  part  of  the  ancient  world. 
It  would  not  be  in  place  here  to  inquire  what  motives 
led  these  wanderers  away  from  their  Asiatic  home,  or 
what  was  the  nature  of  the  settlement  which  they 
made.  They  left  Tyre  and  founded  the  celebrated 
city  of  Carthage,  on  a  spot  where  an  ancient  colony 
from  Sidon  previously  existed.*  Carthage  very  early 
— indeed,  we  might  almost  say,  at  the  start — assumed 
a  higher  character  than  any  previous  colony  or  city 
of  Phoenicia.  It  soon  became,  in  fact,  an  indepen- 
dent political  power.  It  began  to  flourish  at  a  time 
when  Tyre  and  Sidon  were  on  the  decline,  and  when 
these  once  great  cities  had  become  tributary  to  Asiatic 
potentates.  The  Carthaginians  became  first  the  pro- 
tectors, and  soon  afterward,  the  masters  of  all  the 
ancient  Phoenician  colonies  scattered  over  the  western 
world.  Xor  did  they  stop  here  ;  they  became  a  war- 
like and  conquering  empire.  The  political  misfor- 
tunes of  their  mother  country  increased,  by  almost 
uninterrupted  immigration,  the  number  of  poor  free 
*  The  name  Carthage  signifies  a  "  new  borough,"  or  "city." 


32  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

citizens  in  Carthage,  as  well  as  in  other  seacoast 
cities  now  Punic,  though  once  Phoenician — many  of 
them,  indeed,  having  a  numerous  Libyo-Phoenician 
population.  This  surplus  the  Carthaginians  sent  off  as 
colonists  into  the  interior  of  Libya,  where  they  found- 
ed smaller  cities  or  settled  as  agriculturists  among  the 
native  population,  whose  lands,  in  many  instances, 
were  assigned  to  the  new-comers.  The  Carthaginian 
oligarchy  soon  began  to  oppress  and  look  with  con- 
tempt upon  the  ancient  Phoenicians,  Libyo-Phoani- 
cians  and  Libyans.  In  process  of  time,  the  new 
colonists  mixed  with  the  ancient  populations,  and  all 
were  soon  equally  sufferers  from  oppressive  tributes, 
and  exactions.  The  common  hatred  of  these  various 
populations  against  the  oligarchy,  which  frequently 
led  to  revolt,  was  a  .powerful  aid  to  the  ISumidian 
kings  and  to  the  Romans  in  their  efforts  to  crush 
haughty  Carthage. 

The  great  Carthaginian  oligarchs  and  slaveholders 
extended  and  perfected  what  the  Phoenicians  perhaps 
only  began.  They  acquired  in  various  ways  vast 
landed  estates,  and  oppressed  and  impoverished  the 
tributary  colonists  and  small  freeholders  by  grievous 
exactions ;  they  seized  their  homesteads,  and  finally 
reduced  them  to  serfdom  and  slavery.  Toward  the 
decline  of  Carthaginian  power,  such  estates  were 
mostly  cultivated  by  slaves  ;  and  these  slaves — those 
in  the  country  as  well  as  those  in  the  cities — were 
either  Libyo-Phoenicians  and  Libyans,  or  belonged 
to  Asiatic  and  European  races — the  unhappy  individ- 


CARTHAGINIANS.  33 

runs  being  either  bought  or  taken  as  prisoners   of  . 
war.     The  subdued   and   slave  populations  were  as 
mixed  as  the  Carthaginian  armies,  which,  in  Africa 
especially,  contained  a  vast  number  of  negroes — thus 
presenting  an  antetype  of- the  French  Turcos. 

The  gigantic  struggle  of  Carthage  with  Rome  de- 
cided the  destinies  of  the  world.  Carthage  fell.  But 
the  breath  of  the  moribund  slave-holding  oligarchy 
of  Carthage  poisoned  Rome.  The  tragic  malediction 
of  Dido  received  its  fulfilment,  though  not  in  the 
precise  manner  recorded  by  Virgil  in  the  ^Enead. 

After  having  conquered  Carthage  and  Kumidia, 
the  Romans  distributed  among  their  own  colonists 
the  immense  estates  of  the  Carthaginian  slaveholders, 
which,  however,  had  been  previously  appropriated  by 
the  Numidian  kings.  Phoenicians,  Libyo-Phoenin 
cians,  Libyans  and  Carthaginians,  all  now  either  be- 
came Roman  colonists,  or  else  serfs  and  chattels  in 
the  villas  of  their  Roman  masters.  When  the  Van- 
dals  conquered  Africa,  the  Romans  in  their  turn 
shared  the  fate  of  all  their  predecessors,  who  had  in  suc- 
cession been  reduced  to  serfdom  and  domestic  slavery, 
the  one  by  the  other.  In  the  character  of  serfs  and 
chattels,  these  various  races  now  cultivated  for  their 
Vandal  masters  the  lands  and  farms  which  once  were 
their  own.  Thus  affording  an  additional  illustration 
of  the  eternal  and  omnipotent  law  of  retribution  and 
compensation. 


35 


Y. 
HEBKEWS,  OK  BENI-ISKAEL. 

AUTHORITIES  : 

The  Scriptures,  Ewcdd,  JRenan,  Duncker,  Gessenius,  Grotefend,  etc. 

THE  pro-slavery  party,  pacific  as  well  as  militant, 
has  long  sought  to  fall  back  on  the  Mosaic  records  for 
the  justification  of  the  "sacred"  and  "patriarchal" 
institution.  The  historic  records  throw  a  bright  light 
on  the  gray  dawn  of  Hebraic  life — giving  us  an  in- 
sight into  the  primitive  forms  of  society,  not  only  of 
the  Hebrews,  but  of  the  other,  and  especially  the 
Shemitic  inhabitants  of  Syria  and  of  Fore- Asia.  And, 
truly  enough,  servants  and  slaves  are  found  around 
the  tent  of  -the  patriarch. 

It  has  already  been  mentioned  that  in  times  long 
prior  to  any  Definite  chronology,  the  regions  constitu- 
ting Syria,  Palestine  and  Arabia  were  inhabited  by 
various  tribes — some  of  whom  were  offshoots  from 
one  stem  and  some  from  another.  Of  these  tribes, 
some  had  already  formed  themselves  into  well-devel- 
oped societies,  while  others,  if  they  were  not  absolute- 
ly roving  nomads,  yet  often  changed  their  dwellings 
according  to  the  exigencies  of  pastoral  life.  Palestine, 
the  final  home  of  the  Hebrew,  was,  in  all  probability, 
the  earliest  as  well  as  the  chief  highway  of  antiquity 
— especially  for  the  Shemitic  and  Chamitic  races,  just 


36  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

as  the  Caucasus  and  its  slopes  are  supposed  to  have 
been  the  highway  for  Aryan  or  Indo-European  emi- 
grants, and  for  Finnic,  Altaic,  and  Mongolian  or  yel- 
low races.  This  character  it  had  before  the  time  when 
Terah,  Abraham's  father,  drove  his  herds  from  the; 
fable-lands  of  Mesopotamia  (Naharaina) ;  and  it  pre- 
served it  under  Phoenician  as  well  as  under  Hebrew 
dominion.  Repeatedly  did  Egyptians,  Assyrians  and 
Babylonians,  as  well  as  Persians,  and  finally  Alexan- 
der and  his  generals,  march  through  Palestine  in  their 
invading  and  conquering  expeditions.  The  important 
part  which  Palestine  played  in  the  early  commercial 
history  of  the  world,  also,  has  already  been  pointed 
out  while  treating  of  the  Phoenicians. 
f  The  origin  first  of  domestic  servitude,  and  then  of 
absolute  chattelhood,  among  the  primitive  pastoral 
tribes,  may  be  traced  to  two  distinct  sources,  both  of 
them  springing  from  abnormal  conditions  and  events. 
One  source  was  the  constant  feuds  and  wars  of  the 
tribes;  the  other,  individual  indolence  and  shiftless- 
ness.  The  household  of  a  patriarch,  originally 
composed  of  a  family  and  then  of  a  clan,  soon  had  its 
share  of  restless  as  well  as  indolent  dependents.  Such 
hangers-on  were  neither  as  frugal  nor  as  industrious 
as  the  patriarch's  family,  and  so  enjoyed  but  small 
consideration ;  generally,  moreover,  they  were  most 
likely  strangers  who,  through  necessity  or  gratitude, 
adhered  to  the  house  and  considered  themselves  an 
integral  part  of  it.  But  the  patriarch  had  the  most 
absolute  power  over  all  the  members  of  the  family — 


HEBREWS,    BENI-ISRAEL.  87 

over  liis  wife,  his  sons  and  daughters,  and  all  their 
progeny  and  relations.  lie  could  banish  them  from 
the  family  and  hearth ;  he  could  sell  them  away  to 
other* ;  he  had  power  of  life  and  death  over  them  all ; 
and  such  powers,  of  course,  extended  over  dependents 
and  servants.  In  fact,  the  patriarch  was  the  supreme 
and  only-existing  law.  His  will,  and  absolute  obedi- 
ence thereto,  was  the  only  guarantee  of  order  inside 
of  the  tent,  and  outside  of  it  also  in  their  relations 
with  the  tents  and  clans  of  other  patriarchs.  The 
more  exclusive  and  distinct  such  a  family  or  clan  was, 
the  more  independent  it  was  in  all  its  relations  with 
similar  social  crystallizations;  and  the  more  closely 
did  the  dependents  adhere  to  it  for  support  and  pro- 
tection. 

Such  was  undoubtedly  the  origin  of  the  domestic 
servitude  which  appears  in  the  Scriptures  with  the 
apparition  of  Abraham  as  a  distinct  historical  indi- 
viduality. But  such  servants  and  dependents  being 
a  part  of  the  family,  were  not  commonly  sold  nor 
made  an  article  of  merchandise,  and  were  not,  strictly 
speaking,  chattels,  as  were  prisoners  made  in  feuds  or 
wars.*  Besides,  in  the  formation  of  the  primitive 
patriarchal  household,  the  domestic,  pastoral  and  ag- 

*  The  old  colonial  customs  and  legal  regulations  in  America,  fully 
confirm  the  above  statements.  White  servants,  with  or  without  inden- 
ture, were  kept  in  bondage  by  their  masters,  as  were  other  chattels,  and 
sometimes,  though  rarely,  these  servants  were  even  sold.  Without, 
therefore,  going  back  to  any  European  origin,  it  may  be  peremptorily 
asserted  that  it  is  comparatively  a  short  time  since  the  sires  of  many 
haughty  militant  slavery  defenders  were  bondsmen  on  American  soil. 


38  SLAVERY  IN  HISTOEY. 

ricultural  labors  were  performed  by  the  family — chil- 
dren, grandchildren,  etc. ;  just  as  it  is  in  the  present 
day  in  every  simple  household — 'for  a  simple  family 
formed  the  germ  of  the  tribe  and  of  the  retainers 
around  the  tent  of  the  patriarch.  As  the  family  in- 
creased, so  did  the  herds,  and  so  also  did  the  duties  to 
be  performed.  Meanwhile  the  members  of  the  ex- 
panding family  continued  to  attend  to  the  household 
services — -just  as  is  now  the  case  in  similar  circum- 
stances— without  their  becoming  slaves  or  chattels  for 
all  that.  The  primitive  Aryan  language  (of  which 
hereafter)  clearly  confirms  what  both  reason  and  anal- 
ogy assert  as  being  an  inherent  fact  in  the  constitution 
of  every  family,  whatever  may  be  the  peculiarities  of 
skin  or  skull,  or  their  other  ethnic  characteristics. 
Moreover,  even  according  to  those  opposed  to  the  ab- 
solute unity  of  the  whole  human  race,  the  Shemites 
descend  from  the  same  common  progenitor  as  the 
Aryas  (of  whom  are  we),  and  this  affinity  strengthens 
what  was  said  above  concerning  the  similarity  of  their 
domestic  life. 

With  the  increase  of  the  tribes  and  families,  neigh- 
boring or  scattered,  increased  the  degeneracy  of  the 
dependents,  until  finally  these  miserable  persons, 
grown  to  be  an  excrescence  on  the  primitive  Hebrew 
family  life,  and  unable  to  take  care  of  themselves, 
willingly  accepted  slavery — at  times  indeed  craved  it. 
The  same  phenomenon,  under  different  modifications, 
and  occasioned  by  various  causes,  again  and  again  re- 
appears in  divers  nations  and  empires,  just  as  the 


HEBREWS,   OR  BENT-ISRAEL.  39 

same  bodily  maladies  have  constantly  reproduced 
themselves  throughout  the  countless  centuries  of  hu- 
man existence.  And  indeed  the  morale  of  Noah's 
curse  can  only  be,  that  servitude,  being  generated  by 
corruption  of  manhood,  was,  in  its  very  nature,  a  dis- 
eased and  degraded  condition. 

Abraham  belonged  to  a  class  common  to  the  Arabs, 
Hebrews,  and  all  the  Sheinitic  races — shieks  or  chiefs 
of  warlike  tribes,  who  were  in  the  habit  of  making 
war  against  each  other,  carrying  off  prisoners,  and 
even  kidnapping  on  occasion.  It  was  these  victims 
chiefly  that  were  the  objects  of  traffic;  and  this  very 
trait  is  true  of  the  Arab  tribes  down  to  the  present  day. 

The  Hebrews,  liberated  from  captivity  in  Egypt — 
that  is,  from  political  slavery,  which  must  never  be 
confounded  with  chattelhood — fought  against  their 
kinsmen,  the  Shemitic  Canaanites,  with  a  view  to 
make  themselves  a  home  in  a  country  already  thickly 
settled,  and  in  comparatively  advanced  culture  and 
civilization.  The  Hebrews,  poor,  energetic,  and  hard- 
ened by  the  privations  of  a  long  captivity,  bore  the 
same  relation  to  the  nations  of  Canaan  which  they 
invaded,  as  the  half-naked,  half-starved  barbarians 
of  a  long  subsequent  epoch  bore  "to  the  Roman  world, 
against  which  they  rushed  with  the  force  of  doom. 
The  invading  Israelites,  according  to  the  commands  > 
of  Jahveh  (Jehovah),  carried  on  wars  of  extermina- 
tion against  the  Phoenicians,  Philistines,  Ammonites, 
Amorites,  Moabites,  and  other  inhabitants  of  south- 
western Syria.  Many  of  these  original  occupants 


40  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

and  cultivators  of  the  land  of  Canaan  fled  even  to 
Africa,  from  the  exterminating  fury  of  the  Jews,  led 
by  Moses,  Aaron,  and  Joshua.  Meanwhile  the  Jews 
took  possession  of  the  conquered  and  abandoned  lands, 
which  were  divided  between  the  tribes  ;  and  the  great 
body  of  the  Hebrews  settled  on  them  as  agricultur- 
ists and  free  yeomen.  In  process  of  time,  under  the 
direction  and  inspiration  of  Jahveh,  the  supreme 
Lord  of  Israel,  the  body  of  commandments,  regula- 
tions and  ceremonials,  called  the  Mosaic  law,  was 
framed. 

The  law  of  Moses  has  two  prominent  divisions — 
first,  imperative  commands,  and  second,  dispensations. 
In  respect  of  all  absolute  duties  to  God,  as  well  as 
domestic  and  social  duties,  the  law  lays  down  its  com- 
mands even  to  the.  minutest  details,  and  rigidly  con- 
demns their  violator.  But,  on  the  other  hand,  taking 
into  account  human  frailty,  and  the  temptations  to 
which  it  is  exposed,  as  also  the  exigencies  and  cus- 
toms of  life,  the  law  is  also  full  of  dispensations. 
This  twofold  character  of  the  Mosaic  law  affords  its 
antagonists  a  broad  field  for  assaults  on  its  apparent 
contradictions.  The  law  condemns  idolatry,  yet  Aaron, 
the  first  high-priest,  casts  a  golden  calf  for  the  people 
to  worship,  while  Moses  raises  a  brazen  serpent  before 
their  eyes  as  a  material  symbol  for  their  faith.  The 
law  commands  monogamy,  but  permits  and  regulates 
concubinage.  It  prohibits  licentiousness,  fornication, 
and  rape,  but  overlooks  them  in  certain  instances,  as, 
for  example,  after  a  successful  battle  or  the  storming 


HEBREWS,    OR  BENI-ISRAEL.  41 

of  a  city,  because  such  crimes  are  unavoidable  when 
the  demoniac  passions  are  brought  powerfully  into 
play.  Many  other  illustrations  of  this  twofold  char- 
acter of  the  Mosaic  law  might  be  pointed  out. 

But  minute  and  precise  though  the  Mosaic  record  is 
in  its  religious  and  social  commands  and  obligations, 
it  nowhere  commands  the  Hebrews,  as  a  religious  or 
social  duty,  to  enslave  the  Canaanitish  idolaters 
among  whom  they  lived.  Enslavement  and  chattel- 
hood  are  nowhere  laid  down  as  special  duties,  nor  is 
slavery  regarded  as  forming  the  corner-stone  of  the 
Jewish  social,  civil,  and  religious  structure.  Slavery 
is  not  the  subject  of  the  covenant  with  God  or  of  the 
covenant  with  man ;  neither  did  the  possession  of 
slaves  confer  any  political,  religious,  or  social  rights. 
All  this  was  left  for  the  deduction  of  modern  theology 
and  politics. 

The  Mosaic  law  deals  with  slavery  as  with  an  exist-  y 
ing  evil,  and  regulates  it  as  an  abnormal  institution. 
The  lawgiver  recalls  to  the  memory  of  the  Jews  that 
they  were  themselves  captives  and  bondsmen — an  his- 
toric fact  to  which,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the  an- 
cestry of  maify  of  the  slaveholders  in  the  United 
States,  at  the  present  day,  furnish  a  parallel. 

But  perhaps  Biblical  commentators  have  not  drawn 
with  sufficient  severity  the  distinction  in  meaning  be- 
tween the  Hebrew  word  for  "  servant,"  "  attendant," 
etc.,  and  that  for  an  "  absolute  chattel."  Chattelhood, 
in  the  modern  legal  and  practical  application  of  the 
term,  was  undoubtedly  a  rare  condition  in  the  time 


42  SLAVEKY  IN  HISTORY. 

of  the  patriarchs,  and  even  in  the  primitive  theocratic 
epochs  of  Beni-Israel.  The  Hebrew  language  has  four 
words  to  express  the  primitive  domestic  relations  of 
the  race,  and  neither  of  them  will  admit  the  meaning 
of  positive  chattelhood.  Probably  the  oldest  is  the 
word  ctluddaJi,  which  occurs  in  the  book  of  Job, 
whose  dialect  is  considered  by  modern  philologists  to 
be  far  older  than  the  Mosaic  scriptures  ;  the  same  word 
is  also  found  once  only  in  Genesis  (Gessenius  Diet.) 
It  is  a  collective  noun,  and  signifies  "  attendants," 
"  laborers,"  and,  according  to  some  exegetes,  it  also 
signifies  an  "estate."  Such  may  perhaps  be  its  mean- 
ing in  the  book  of  Job,  as  it  occurs  after  the  enumera- 
tion of  various  movables,  such  as  flocks  and  herds, 
and  may  thus,  in  distinction,  convey  the  idea  of  real 
property.  The  logical  sequence  in  such  enumerations 
was  undoubtedly  the  same  then  as  it  is  now — mov- 
ables first  in  order,  then  landed  property.  Another 
Hebrew  word  for  the  primitive  domestic  servant  is 
nrfar,  but  its  application  seems  to  have  been  rather 
limited ;  it  is  mostly  employed  to  designate  a  "  lad- 
servant"  or  "  apprentice."  The  word  most  generally 
used,  however,  and  the  one  most  variotsly  translated 
and  explained  by  lexicographers  is  e*bed :  it  variously 
signifies  "  subject,"  "  servant,"  "serf,"  "slave,"  "at- 
tendant," "  officer,"  etc.  Its  application  to  a  "  serf" 
or  "  slave"  has  perhaps  rather  a  moral  or  ideal  than  a 
positive  legal  or  social  sense.  Thus,  when  in  Genesis 
it  is  said  that  "  Moses  removed  the  swarms  of  flies 
from  Pharaoh,  from  his  servants  (e'1>ed),  and  from  his 


43 

people,"  the  word  dbed  undoubtedly  signifies  "  min- 
isters," "  courtiers,"  "  officers,"  and  "  servants  of  the 
court,"  and  not  actual  serfs  or  slaves.  Common  sense 
would  surely  indicate  that  chattels  could  not  have 
been  mentioned  immediately  afteV  the  great  Pharaoh, 
and  before  his  people ;  and  still  less  likely  is  it  that 
the  oriental  despotism  which  reduced  all  to  political 
slaves  was  unknown  in  the  Egypt  of  the  early  Phar- 
aohs. Finally,  the  word  dbduh  alone  may  signify  a 
"  slave"  in  the  strict  sense  of  the  term  ;  it  is  used  by 
Ezra,  and  belongs  to  a  period  of  national  degradation, 
when  both  slavery  and  idolatry  flourished  in  Israel. 

Slavery,  however,  never  became  an  integral  element 
of  Hebrew  life,  nor,  during  their  centuries  of  glory, 
did  its  pestilence-breath  endanger  the  national  vital- 
ity. The  Mosaic  record,  covering  a  period  of  nearly 
one  thousand  years,  never  mentions  any  slave  revolt, 
such  as  so  often  shook  the  neighboring  and  contem- 
poraneous Phoenicians. 

For  domestic  slaves,  the  Hebrews  procured  foreign- 
ers, through  traffic  or  by  war ;  and  such  slaves  were 
of  the  same  race  as  the  slaves  of  the  Phoenicians  and 
other  neighboring  nations.  In  the  history  of  the 
Beni-Israel,  there  are  long  episodes  containing  ac- 
counts of  wars,  principally  with  tribes  belonging  to 
the  same  Shemitic  family  from  which  the  Hebrews 
themselves  sprang,  and  many  of  the  slaves  made  in 
these  wars  must  have  belonged  to  the  nearest  cities 
and  kingdoms.  If  these  had  been  so  numerous  as  to 
be  employed  in  large  bodies  in  agricultural  labor,  un- 


44  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

doubtedly  there  would  have  been  revolts  during  the 
absence  of  their  masters  on  military  expeditions,  or 
even  .during  times  of  peace.  The  absence  of  any  such 
event  in  the  history  of  the  Hebrews,  proves  that 
domestic  slavery  was  for  many  long  centuries  recog- 
nized only  as  an  abnormal  institution,  and  its  growth 
circumscribed  by  jubilees  and  limitary  statutes. 

The  regulations  prescribing  the  status  of  slaves,  and 
their  general  condition,  are  within  the  reach  of  every 
one.  Their  spirit  is  mild  and  beneficent  for  the  bond- 
man ;  the  duration  of  his  slavery  is  limited — his  treat- 
ment is  humane,  and  the  condition  not  ordinarily 
hereditary.  In  the  times  of  the  early  patriarchs,  a 
servant  could  become  the  chief  of  the  family — thus 
proving  that  some  commentators  have  made  a  strange 
confusion  in  the  interpretation  of  the  above-mentioned 
Hebrew  word  (died),  when  they  construe  it  as  apply- 
ing to  such  a  system  as  modern  American  slavery.  A 
servant  who  was  eligible  to  become  the  chief  of  a 
family  could  not  be  a  chattel,  but  must  necessarily 
have  been  a  member  of  the  clan,  with  independent 
powers  and  rights,  and  at  least  the  proprietorship  of 
himself. 

Among  the  Hebrews,  also,  a  man  could  voluntarily 
sell  himself  into  slavery ;  thus  the  debtor  paid  his 
debts  with  his  own  bod}^  or  with  that  of  his  wife  or 
child.  This  custom  was  almost  universal  in  early 
antiquity,  as  well  as  among  the  Romans  and  the  bar- 
barous Germans.  But  the  Mosaic  law  appointed  a  j 
regular  epoch  for  the  emancipation  of  all  slaves,  and 


HEBREWS,   OR  BENMSRAEL.  45 

therefore  of  debtors  among  the  rest ;  and  the  opera- 
tion of  this  law  it  was  which  made  hereditary  slavery 
of  such  comparatively  rare  occurrence. 

Slaves,  therefore,  even  when  bought  from  the  Gen- 
tiles, and  therefore  considered  unclean  by  the  Hebrews, 
or  when  prisoners  taken  in  war,  were  not  cut  off  from 
the  general  law  of  protection.  They  enjoyed  human 
rights,  and  some  of  the  civil  privileges  of  the  Jewish 
born.  No  absolute  distinctions  of  men  can  be  traced 
in  the  Mosaic  law  without  perverting  its  whole  moral 
tendency.  When  a  slave  received  any  severe  wound 
from  his  master,  he  was  from  thence  declared  free, 
and  the  Jewish  law  punishes  with  death  the  sale  of  a 
freeman  into  slavery — (a  fact,  by  the  way,  in  striking 
contrast  with  the  great  social  movement  of  the  mili- 
tant pro-slavery  party,  whose  policy  it  is  to  enslave 
both  emancipated  and  free-born).  A  slave  concubine 
could  not  be  sold  to  strangers — still  less  her  children 
by  her  master.  But  if  he  wished  to  be  rid  of  her,  the 
master  was  obliged  to  find  her  a  husband  or  another 
master  among  his  relatives  or  friends.  In  the  old 
colonial  times  in  America,  the  law  inflicted  a  penalty 
on  white  servants  and  'bondsmen  for  mixing  with  black 
chattels — but  what  penalty  threatened  the  white  mas- 
ters for  the  same  offence?  The  fact  is,  the  slave- 
breeders  of  the  slave  regions  continually  invoke  the 
Bible  to  justify  their  doings,  and  continually  violate 
Scriptural  regulations. 

The  Mosaic  law  commands  :  "Thou  shalt  not  de- 
liver unto  his  master  the  servant  which  is  escaped 


46  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

from  his  master  unto  thee  :  he  shall  dwell  with  thee, 
even  among  you,  in  the  place  which  he  shall  choose 
in  one  of  thy  gates,  where  it  liketh  him  best :  thou 
shalt  not  oppress  him."  Some  modern  commentators 
attempt  to  contract  this  humane  and  universal  com- 
mand, by  arguing  that  it  only  applied  to  Jewish  lorn 
servants  or  slaves ;  but  sound  criticism  utterly  anni- 
hilates the  assumption.  On  the  contrary,  the  phrase 
"in  one  of  thy  gates"  is  a  positive  proof  that  the 
command  had  in  view  fugitives  of  every  tribe  and 
kingdom.  All  Gentiles,  slaves  as  well  as  freemen, 
were  considered  by  the  Jews  "  unclean,"  and  there 
might  have  been  some  difficulty  in  admitting  such 
runaways  into  their  houses.  But  whatever  was  the 
creed  or  nationality  of  the  escaped,  he  found  safety 
" in  the  gates"  and  from  thence  could  not  be  " deliv- 
ered unto  his  master."  Difference  of  religion  and 
not  of  race  constituted  the  paramount  distinction  be- 
tween the  Jew  and  the  Gentile ;  if  the  command, 
therefore,  were  exclusively  applicable  to  the  Jewish 
slave,  even  then  its  spirit  is  violated  by  the  Ameri- 
can fugitive  slave  act,  to  uphold  which,  the  Mosaic 
law  is  blasphemed — for  the  enslaved  race  of  Christian 
America  are  of  the  same  faith  and  baptism  as  their 
owners. 

With  the  increase  of  luxury  and  corruption  under 
the  Hebrew  kings,  kidnapping  and  the  traffic  in  men 
and  women  seem  to  have  largely  increased.  The 
slaves  stolen  in  piratical  expeditions  among  neighbor- 
ing tribes  were  exported  to  a  distance,  while  others 


HEBREWS,   OR  BENI-ISRAEL.  47 

were  imported  from  thence  into  Judea.  But  against 
this  practice  the  prophets — those  inspired  successors 
of  the  lawgiver  of  Sinai — thundered  terribly.  The 
Edomites  and  other  Phoenicians — who  seem  to  have 
been  pre-eminently  the  slave-traders  of  their  time — 
importing  slaves  from  Gaza,  which  was  then  a  great 
thoroughfare  and  commercial  metropolis,  and  export- 
ing them  to  other  points,  were  declared  to  be  the 
most  accursed  of  nations.  So  now,  the  modern  Edom- 
ites of  this  continent,  who  have  again  revived  the 
slave-traffic  between  Africa  and  this  country,  together 
with  all  who  aid,  abet,  patronize  or  excuse  them,  come 
under  the  curse  so  often  denounced  against  their  ancient 
prototypes. 

Under  the  kings,  also,  domestic  slavery  became 
more  extensive,  and  its  influence  more  fatal.  It  did 
not  yet,  however,  succeed  in  devouring  the  vitals  of 
the  nation,  or  wholly  destroying  the  small  homesteads 
and  the  free  yeomanry,  as  it  afterward  did  in  Greece, 
and  over  almost  the  entire  ancient  world  under  re- 
publican and  imperial  Rome.  The  epoch  of  the  kings 
is  one  of  moral  degradation  and  effeminacy  on  the  one 
hand,  and  of  disasters  and  captivities  to  the  Jews 
themselves,  on  the  other.  Sensuality  and  general  de- 
pravity flourished  rank  and  wild  under  the  malignant 
influence  of  domestic  slavery.  Slavery  relaxed  the 
ties  of  family  and  society  among  the  Jews,  as  history 
shows  it  to  have  done  in  every  place  and  in  all  ages 
of  its  existence — for  slavery,  sensuality  and  general 
depravity  mutually  engender  and  sustain  each  other. 


48  SLAVEKY   IN   HISTORY. 

But  in  their  ^deepest  and  most  helpless  degradation, 
the  Jews  never  sold  the  offspring  of  their  own  per- 
sonal lechery  into  slavery  :  this  advance  on  the  turpi- 
tude of  Hebraic  slavery — this  outrage  on  the  human- 
ity of  the  faith  we  inherit  from  the  Jews — ;was  first 
justified  and  systematized  by  the  slave  states  of  the 
great  Republic  of  the  West !  In  ancient  as  in  Chris- 
tian times,  there  were  doubtless  parents  who  aban- 
doned their  legitimate  or  illegitimate  offspring  to  pub- 
lic mercy,  to  accident,  or  to  servitude  ;  but  all  legisla- 
tors have  condemned  such  inhumanity,  and  tried,  if 
possible,  to  regulate  and  soften  it.  So,  deliberate 
selling  of  one's  children  may  anciently  have  occurred 
in  solitary  instances;  but  it  was  always  and  every- 
where condemned  as  the  sum  of  all  infamies. 

Many  of  the  tutelary  regulations  for  the  slaves  laid 
down  in  the  law,  fell,  it  is  true,  into  disuse,  even  as 
other  parts  of  the  law  were  violated  by  the  wayward 
and  stiffhecked  Israelites.  On  the  advent  to  power 
of  the  good  Josiah,  however,  the  violated  command- 
ments and  regulations  of  Moses,  including  those  con- 
cerning the  slaves,  were  rigidly  enforced,  and  a  gen- 
eral reformation  inaugurated. 

The  increase  of  wealth,  the  various  modifications 
and  changes  generated  in  the  organism  of  society  by 
its  growth,  as  also  by  wars,  captivities,  changes  of 
government,  etc.,  brought  forth  a  new  subordinate 
condition  in  the  domestic  and  civil  life  of  the  Hebrews 
— it  was  that  of  the  client,  and  belongs  to  the  latter 
epoch  of  the  kings.  Theologians  of  doubtful  learn- 


HEBREWS,    OR  BENI-ISRAEL.  49 

ing,  and  still  more  dubious  honesty,  argue  that  such 
clients  were  slaves ;  but,  in  truth,  the  clients  among 
the  Hebrews  were  no  more  the  slaves  of  their  patrons 
than  the  same  class  were  among  the  Komans  or  Gauls. 
The  Hebrew  client  was  a  subordinate,  but  independ- 
ent •  he  was  under  the  protection  of  his  patron,  but 
both  were  bound  by  mutual  obligations  and  prescribed 
conditions  ;  and  the  property  and  estate  of  the  patron 
were  often  under  the  guardianship  of  the  client. 
Many  expressions  in  the  Scriptures,  also,  bearing  on 
the  mission  of  the  future  Messianic  servant  of  Jahveh, 
mean  properly  a  client,  and  not  a  slave  or  a  chattel. 

The  old  kingdom  of  Judea  was  overthrown  in  wars 
with  Assyria  and  Babylon  ;  and  the  Jews  were  car- 
ried away  as  captives.  These  repeated  captivities 
chiefly  befell  the  most  wealthy  and  influential  part  of 
the  population.  Such  captives  generally  became 
political  slaves,  that  is,  were  deprived  of  political, 
though  not  of  religious  or  civil  rights,  and  were  not 
made  domestic  slaves  or  chattels.  They  became  the 
property  of  the  king  or  of  the  state ;  but  were  not 
individually  subject  to  be  scattered  or  sold ;  in  fact, 
they  became  colonists,  and  lands  were  assigned  them 
in  some  part  of  the  empire.  Thus  Tiglath-Palassar 
colonized  certain  regions  north  of  Nineveh  with 
Hebrews ;  and  Sargon  (or  Sargina)  transplanted  others 
to  Media.  In  the  Babylonian  captivities  their  con- 
dition was  precisely  similar :  thus,  when  Cyrus  liber- 
ated forty- two  thousand  three  hundred  and  sixty  Jews 
from  captivity  in  Babylon,  there  were  among  them 
3 


50  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

only  seven  thousand  three  hundred  and  eighty-seven 
slaves,  or  about  one-sixth  of  the  whole  number.  . 

Domestic  slavery,  as  we  have  seen,  made  consider- 
able havoc  among  the  Beni-Israel,  and  its  life  was 
continually  recruited  by  wars  and  the  consequent  ruin 
and  impoverishment  of  the  people,  as  well  as  by  other 
causes  already  pointed  out.  But  down  to  the  last1 
breath  of  the  political  and  national  existence  of  the 
Jews — to  the  day  of  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  and 
the  hour  of  final  dispersion — slavery  never  succeeded 
in  wholly  destroying  the  humble  homesteads  of  the 
free  rural  population — as  it  did  in  other  nations  and 
empires  of  antiquity :  for  example,  it  never  extirpated 
the  free  agricultural  yeomanry  in  Palestine  as  it  after- 
ward did  iii  the  Roman  world,  from  the  Atlantic  to  the 
Euphrates.  The  free  population  was  mostly  devoted 
to  agriculture,  and  possessed  homesteads ;  and  these 
small  free  homesteads  were  regarded  almost  as  sacred 
— even  kings  could  only  by  violence  seize  upon  the 
poor  man's  farm. 

Little  Palestine,  to  the  East,  swarmed  like  a  beehive 
with  people,  notwithstanding  captivities,  calamities, 
and  exterminating  wars.  At  the  time  of  David,  the 
kingdom  of  Palestine  was  about  the  size  of  the  present 
kingdom  of  Portugal,  and  had  a  population  of  about 
three  million  eight  hundred  thousand.  Under  Solo- 
mon, his  son,  fifty-three  thousand  six  hundred  foreign- 
born  slaves  worked  at  the  construction  of  the  temple, 
most  of  whom,  probably,  were  the  property  of  the 
king  or  of  the  state— not  private  chattels.  If  we  al- 


HEBREWS,   OR  BENI-ISRAEL.  51 

low  that  the  number  of  Jewish-born  slaves  of  both 
sexes  and  of  all  ages  was  even  four  times  as  large 
(which  is  not  at  all  likely,  considering  the  source  and 
means  of  supply  of  slaves),  it  will  give  only  two 
hundred  and  sixty-eight  thousand  slaves  of  every  type, 
in  Judea,  or  one-fourteenth  part  of  the  population.* 

How  corrupt  soever  the  law  and  its  regulations  be- 
came, both,  nevertheless,  remained  a  check  upon  do- 
mestic slavery.  Long  previous  to  the  terrible  Flavian 
epoch,  the  Hebrews  were  thickly  scattered  over  the 
eastern  and  western  world,  not  as  exported  slaves,  but 
as  wanderers  and  adventurers :  there  may,  indeed, 
have  been  slaves  among  them,  but  such  slaves  formed 
the  minority.  Strangers,  indeed,  they  were,  but  free 
according  to  then  existing  municipal  limitations.  It 
was  the  surplus  of  a  free  population  that  thus  wan- 
dered abroad  in  search  of  better  fortunes — a  phenom- 
enon which  is  reproduced  in  the  present  day  by  the 
immigration  to  America  of  the  surplus  population 
of  various  European  states.  So  large  was  this  emi- 
gration that,  in  the  time  of  Cicero,  the  Jews,  Italians 
and  Greeks  formed  the  principal  nationalities  that 
took  part  in  the  tumults  of  the  Roman  forum,  and  on 
one  occasion  they  hooted  Cicero  while  on  the  rostrum. 
The  great  and  striking  fact  of  the  preservation  of  the 
people  of  Beni-Israel,  and  its  increase  at  an  epoch 

*  Flavins  Josephus  says,  that  under  the  Herods,  Judea  contained 
double  the  population  established  by  the  census  of  David.  Perhaps  this 
account  is  exaggerated ;  but,  at  any  rate,  it  shows  a  great  and  positive 


52  SLAVERY  IN  HISTOEY. 

when  the  populations  of  other  countries  were  slowly- 
dying  out,  is  to  be  attributed  solely  to  the  curb  which 
the  law  imposed  on  domestic  slavery,  and  which  it 
partially  maintained  even  in  the  times  of  the  greatest 
national  decay. 

On  our  knowledge  of  the  internal  organism  and 
economy  of  the  Hebrews,  may  be  based  certain  de- 
ductions as  to  the  domestic  economy  of  other  contem- 
poraneous nations,  especially  those  of  Syria  and  cer- 
tain parts  of  west  Asia.  Lydia,  and  above  all,  Baby- 
lon and  Assyria  are  historically  known  only  in  the  last 
stages  of  their  existence,  when  political  and  domestic 
slavery  had  almost  completely  fused  themselves  to- 
gether. For  earlier  times,  the  sources  of  investiga- 
tion are  limited,  if  not  altogether  wanting,  and  analo- 
gy alone  can  guide  research.  It  is,  however,  prob- 
able that  only  the  Mosaic  law  remained  to  combat 
and  regulate  serfdom  and  slavery  with  moral  and 
legal  weapons.  The  Hebrews  did  not  possess,  and 
did  not  transmit  to  history,  any  of  the  products  of  a 
brilliant  civilization  or  of  a  refined  culture  such  as 
reaches  us  in  echoes  from  the  antique  oriental  empires. 
But  the  Hebrews  were,  at  the  same  time,  endowed 
with  certain  spiritual  impulses,  aspirations  and  ideas, 
far  grander  than  those  of  any  of  the  surrounding  na- 
tions. Material  civilization  and  culture  cannot  be 
considered  as  the  highest  manifestation  of  man's  spirit. 
History  presents  examples  of  the  development  of  the 
noblest  human  impulses  to  a  degree  out  of  all  propor- 
tion with  the  so-called  "  civilization  "  of  the  nation. 


53 

The  authority  of  the  Scriptures  is  invoked  as  abso- 
lute sanction  for  the  enslavement  of  one  branch  of 
the  human  family ;  arid  the  theological  right  to  en- 
slave the  African  is  based  on  the  well-known  words 
of  Noah :  "  Cursed  be  Canaan  :  a  servant  of  servants 
shall  he  be  unto  his  brethren.''  The  general  import 
of  these  words,  however,  even  in  the  strictest  con- 
struction, has  rather  a  reference  to  their  degradation 
as  a  caste — exemplified  in  the  case  of  the  swineherds 
among  the  Egyptians,  or  the  Qudras  (Soudras)  among 
the  Hindus—  either  of  which,  however,  were  chattels 
deprived  of  human  and  family  rights. 

Modern  criticism,  guided  chiefly  by  the  light  of 
comparative  philology  and  ethnology,  has  established 
beyond  any  doubt  the  genuine  meaning  of  the  patri- 
archal names  of  Scripture.  Down  to  Abraham,  or  at 
the  utmost  to  Terah  his  father,  all  those  names  bear 
an  ethnical  or  geographical  signification.  Abraham, 
however,  is  an  historical  person,  and  with  him  positive 
Jewish  history  opens. 

Moses  and  the  other  writers  of  the  book  of  Genesis 
were  educated  among  the  highly  learned  and  scientific 
Egyptians ;  and  in  Palestine  they  came  in  contact 
with  a  highly  advanced  civilization  among  the  Ca- 
naanites  or  Phoenicians,  Arabians,  and  ISTabatheans, 
who  were  then  in  the  full  tide  of  life  and  action. 
From  these  kindred  Shemitic  peoples  the  Hebrews 
learned  the  use  of  written  characters ;  and  many  of 
the  scientific  discoveries  of  these  epochs  are  dimly 
preserved  in  the  Mosaic  record,  as  also  the  general 


54  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

outlines  of  the  ethnic  knowledge  of  the  age.  Mosea 
and  the  other  writers  did  but  record  the  various  geo- 
graphic and  ethnic  names  which  came  to  their  ears, 
and  for  this  no  inspiration  was  necessary.  Modern  sci- 
entific criticism,  guided  by  the  inductions  of  reason — 
that  grandest  product  of  the  hand  of  God — now  infuses 
living  spirit  into  what  was  for  ages  a  dead  and  incom- 
prehensible letter.  This  can  be  easily  elucidated  by  a 
few  examples.  The  word  Ham,  or  Erez-Cham,  has  no 
root  or  meaning  in  Hebrew  or  any  other  Shemitic  dia- 
lect ;  it  was  doubtless  borrowed  from  the  Egyptians, 
and  to  Egypt  must  we  go  for  the  solution  of  its  signi- 
fication. Other  Biblical  names,  as,  for  example,  Eber, 
Pheleg  or  Peleg,  JReu  or  Rehu,  Serug  and  Nahor, 
represent  distinct  Shemitic  tribes,  or,  as  the  record 
tropically  styles  them,  kingdoms  and  states,  of  Meso- 
potamia (Naharaina).  Eber,  or  more  properly,  Heber 
(whence  our  "  Hebrews"),  signifies  "  the  stranger"  or 
"  a  person  from. the  other  side,"  that  is,  one  who  came 
from  a  foreign  region.  Aram  also  implies  an  immi- 
grant from  the  other  side  of  the  Euphrates.  So,  like- 
wise Misraim  (the  Misr  or  M-R  of  the  Egyptians), 
Gush,  Phut  and  Lud,  constituted  distinct  tribes  and 
nations  in  widely  distant  regions,  and  perhaps  even 
belonged  to  different  races,  according  to  accepted 
schemes  of  ethnology.  Lud  answers  to  the  Libyan 
Lewatah,  the  Lcguatan  of  the  Byzantine  writers,  and 
the  classical  Garaman.  Phut  and  Lud  belong  to 
Africa ;  they  are  brothers  of  Mizraim,  or  its  nearest 
ethnic  relations  in  the  remotest  antiquity,  or  perhaps 


HEBREWS,   BENI-ISRAEL.  55 

closely  allied  but  independent  tribes — as  the  Scrip- 
tures generally  record  tribes  and  states  politically  and 
geographically- independent.  Phutrsmd  Lud  are  also 
mentioned  as  the  allied  troops  of  the  Egyptians,  or  of 
the  Syrians.  Finally  Lud  (Ludim)  descends  from 
Mizrairn  ;  so  it  may  be  that  they  were  a  branch  of  the 
Egyptian  stem,  just  as  the  Irish  are  an  offshoot  of  the 
Gallo-Celtic  stock,  or  the  Anglo-Saxons  of  the  Teutonic 
trunk. 

The  curse  of  Noah  was  hurled  against  Canaan.  The 
philological  and  ethnic  signification  of  this  name  has 
already  been  explained.  The  Canaanites,  although 
themselves  but  an  elder  branch  of  the  Shemitic  family, 
were  the  enemies  of  Beni-Israel,  who  conquered  them 
and  drove  them  from  their  land  and  homes.  There  is 
thus  a  manifest  logic  in  the  writer  of  this  part  of  Gen- 
esis condemning  them  to  eternal  servitude — for  it  was 
written  after  the  subjugation  of  the  Canaanites.  In- 
deed, the  same  policy  of  enslavement  was  pursued  by 
almost  all  the  ancient  conquering  Nations  in  the  flush 
of  their  victorious  battles ;  and  so,  in  later  times,  did 
the  Longobards  of  Italy,  the  Goths  and  Franks  in 
Gaul  and  Spain,  the  Anglo-Saxons  in  Britain,  and  the 
Normans  in  England  and  Ireland. 

There  seems  to  be  no  scientific  doubt  that  the  cursed 
Canaanites  were  of  the  same  family  and  stock  as  the 
Hebrews.  After  the  most  searching  and  conscien- 
tious investigations  in  ethnology  and  philology,  it  is 
impossible  to  regard  the  Canaanites  or  Phoenicians  as 
other  than  Shemites  ;  and  with  this  also  coincide  the 


56  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

Scriptures — their  land  of  Canaan  is  not  in  Africa. 
Who  the  Cushites  of  antiquity  were,  has  likewise 
been  already  pointed  out.  And  if,  as  some  have  at- 
tempted to  prove,  the  ancient  Egyptians  were  not  of 
the  African  race  (according  to  our  modern  designa- 
tion), then  they  were  the  Chamites,  Cushites,  etc.,  of 
Scripture.  How,  through  them,  the  curse  can  be 
shown  to  reach  the  genuine  African,  requires  an  effort 
of  casuistry  repulsive  both  to  logic  and  fact — nay,  to 
the  baldest  common  sense.  ISTot  the  dimmest  shadow 
of  authority  can  be  tortured  from  the  Scriptures  for 
the  enslavement  of  the  black  or  negro  race.  With 
somewhat  sounder  logic  has  this  curse  of  Canaan  been 
applied,  even  in  Christian  times,  and  among  European 
nations,  to  classes  kept  in  bondage  by  masters  belong- 
ing to  the  same  race.  Slavery,  indeed,  has  been  the 
common  fate,  in  successive  epochs,  of  all  human  races 
and  families ;  and  the  oppressor  has  never  been  want- 
ing in  a  pious  plea.  The  so-called  nobility  of  the 
mediaeval  Christian1  ages  considered  the  burghers  and 
subdued  laborers  as  being  of  impure  and  degraded 
blood,  and  all  over  Europe  they  were  held  to  be  the 
descendants  of  Ham.  (Some  old  aristocratic  Euro- 
pean families  even  now  consider  all  who  are  not 
nobles  to  be  of  the  degraded  caste).  According  to 
this  construction  of  the  Koachic  curse,  the  foul  taint 
even  now  circulates  not  in  the  vein  of  the  African 
slave,  but  in  the  veins  of  the  tyrants  who  oppress 
him.  Neither  the  Egyptians,  Phoenicians,  Hebrews, 
nor,  indeed,  any  nation  of  antiquity,  considered  any 


HEBKEWS,   BENT-ISRAEL.  57 

special  race  or  tribe  as  absolutely  predestined  to  eter- 
nal bondage.  This  abominable  conception  is  a  putrid 
growth  from  mental,  social  and  moral  decay.  Even 
Moses  had  a  black  woman  for  his  wife  (not  his  concu- 
bine), and,  nevertheless,  was  admitted  to  converse 
with  Jehovah. 

The  present  historical  investigation  aims  not  at  the 
vindication  of  the  African :  science  and  history  do 
this  triumphantly  for  all  honest  and  intelligent  minds. 
These  pages  have  but  in  view  to  exhibit  the  terrific 
havoc  and  devastation  which  domestic  slavery  brings 
on  all  races,  nations  and  civilizations,  and  to  point  out 
the  complete  analogy  of  slavery  as  it  existed  in  the 
past  with  that  which  still  blasts  our  country  and  our 
age.  The  leprosy  of  early  Egypt,  Syria  and  Judea, 
was  the  same  as  that  which  existed  long  centuries 
afterward  in  western  Europe ;  and  so  also  is  it  with 
the  social  leprosy  of  the  ages.  And  as,  in  special  con- 
ditions, a  disease  may  assume  a  more  deadly  intensity, 
so  also  do  social  maladies  at  times  show  themselves 
with  increased  virulence.  In  antiquity,  domestic  sla- 
very seized  hold  of  all  races  and  all  social  and  civiJ 
conditions :  it  was  not  exclusively  fastened  on  any 
special  race.  It  may  be  for  this  reason  that  it  ate  but  I 
slowly  into  the  marrow  of  the  antique  civilizations 
Kow  modern  sophistry  attempts  to  give  a  divine  am 
moral  sanction  to  chattel  slavery,  and  bases  its  justice 
on  the  absolute  and  predestined  inferiority  of  tho 
Hack  race.  But  the  natural  work  of  slavery  in  de- 
stroying manhood,  morals  and  intellect,  progresses 
3* 


58  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

with  terrible  rapidity  in  this  country,  and  is  here  re- 
ceiving its  most  mournful  illustration. 

But  what  is  the  testimony  of  the  highest  scientific 
generalization  on  this  question  of  the  natural  inferior- 
ity of  the  African  ?  All  the  authoritative  names  in 
comparative  anatomy  and  physiology — Owen,  Flou- 
rens,  Bachman,  Muller,  Haenle,  Pritchard,  Wagner, 
Yogt  and  Draper,  among  them — together  with  men 
4of  the  mental  calibre  and  scientific  attainments  of 
"William  and  Alexander  von  Humboldt — men  of 
every  variety  of  scientific  theory,  and  discussing  the 
question  from  every  possible  stand-point — universally 
deny  the  existence  of  any  absolute  inferiority  of  the 
negro  race,  or  even  any  essential  difference  or  line  of 
demarcation  between  the  races  at  all !  The  physiolog- 
ical and  craniological  differences  which  are  so  easily 
observed,  do  not  amount  to  a  difference  of  species  / 
and  cerebral  physiology  makes  no  essential  distinction 
between  the  brain  of  a  white  man — even  an  Anglo- 
Saxon — and  that  of  a  negro. 

Still  more  groundless  are  the  current  assertions 
concerning  the  mental  inferiority  of  the  African  race. 
If  such  an  inferiority  really  exists  at  the  present  day, 
it  is,  at  the  utmost,  but  transient  and  conditional  in 
its  nature.  It  can  only  be  such  an  inferiority  as  for 
countless  centuries  characterized  the  northern  races 
in  contrast  to  the  southern.  While  the  former  roved 
and  fought  as  savages  in  the  wilds  and  forests,  the 
latter  were  elaborating  grand  and  harmonious  civili- 
zations. It  is  difficult  to  imagine  what  would  have 


59 

been  the  condition  of  the  Germans — aye,  even  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons — what  kind  of  civilization  they  would 
have  inaugurated — without  their  Christian,  Roman 
and  Gallo-Celtic  inoculation.  If  it  be  urged  that  cer- 
tain African  tribes  are  less  susceptible  of  culture,  or 
less  endowed  with  intellectual  qualities  and  capacities 
than  certain  white  tribes  or  their  offshoots — is  it  not 
also  the  case  that  the  offspring  from  the  same  parents 
may  have  widely  varying  powers,  tendencies  and 
capacities  ;  and  that  diverse  tribes  and  nations  spring- 
ing from  the  same  ethnic  source,  have  played  very 
different  parts  in  the  drama  of  universal  history  ? 

In  the  remotest  antiquity,  the  great  Gallo-Celtic 
stem  actively  influenced  the  destinies  of  Europe,  and 
a  part  of  Asia ;  yet  it  is  only  eighty  years  since  the 
historian  Pinckerton,  speaking  of  Ireland  and  the 
Irish — those  purest  Celtic  remains,  said :  "  It  is  in- 
deed a  matter  of  supreme  indifference  at  what  time 
the  savages  of  a  continent  peopled  a  neighboring 
island"  (Ireland).  This  remark  it  would  be  difficult 
to  justify — although  there  are  even  now  many  English- 
men who  consider  the  genuine  Irish  an  inferior  race, 
and  one,  too,  incapable  of  any  high  development. 

The  moral  and  mental  growth  of  those  Africans 
who  were  formerly  slaves  in  the  British  West  Indies, 
shows  the  possibility  of  negro  culture  under  the  in- 
fluence of  freedom.  The  official  reports  of  the  various 
governors  of  these  islands,  show  that,  since  emancipa- 
tion, there  has  been  a  rapid  and  steady  growth  of 
their  prosperity;  and  the  absolute  veracity  winch 


60  SLAVERY  IN   HISTORY. 

characterizes  these  reports  of  English  agents  to  their 
government  cannot  for  a  moment  be  doubted.  In 
some  of  the  islands,  such  as  Nassau  and  others,  the 
products  and  revenues  have  increased  a  hundred-fold, 
while  the  cost  of  administration  (for  keeping  protec- 
tive fleets  and  repressive  soldiery,  needed  now  no 
more)  has  greatly  diminished.  They  also  certify  to 
a  great  increase  in  the  imports  from  England — their 
mother  country  in  the  noblest  sense  of  the  word. 
Even  the  export  of  sugar  is  nearly  equal  to  what  it 
was  under  the  forced  labor  of  slavery,  while  its  in- 
trinsic production  has  vastly  increased — the  domestic 
consumption  far  surpassing  what  it  was  in  the  palm- 
iest days  of  the  planters.  These  are  facts  which  only 
hypocrisy  can  pervert,  or  perversion  conceal. 

With  reference  also  to  the  question  of  the  "  viability" 
and  longevity  of  hybrids,  mulattoes,  etc.,  science  pro- 
tests against  the  fallacy  which  the  new  pro-slavery 
apostles  advocate.  Facts  confirm  the  deductions  of 
genuine  science,  and  explode  the  fallacies  of  its  coun- 
terfeit. The  Dominican  Republic  is  almost  entirely 
composed  of  a  mulatto  population,  which  is  now  in  its 
second  or  third  generation,  if  not  older.  Neither  are 
these  mulattoes  dying  out,  but  they  are  increasing  by 
and  within  themselves.  No  human  white  stallions 
are  imported  there  from  slave-breeding  regions  to  cor- 
rect or  keep  up  the  breed. 

If,  however,  there  should  still  linger  a  presump- 
tion of  .the  superiority  of  the  white  over  the  black 
man,  it  must  speedily  vanish  when  the  arguments 


HEBREWS,    BENI-ISRAEL.  61 

ments  of  the  militant  upholders  of  slavery — whether 
they  be  in  senatorial  togas,  in  priestly  robes,  or  in 
printer's  ink — are  subjected  to  the  analysis  of  impar- 
tial philosophy  or  common  logic.  A  spurious  and 
depraved  civilization  is  far  more  dangerous  and  de- 
grading to  society,  and  more  truly  evidences  positive 
mental  inferiority,  than  does  the  absence  of  civilization 
or  the  primitive  savage  condition.  And  this  is  the 
more  true  when  the  subjects  of  such  a  spurious  civi- 
lization have  within  reach  the  elements  of  a  genuine 
moral  and  social  culture,  but  at  the  same  time  spurn 
and  depreciate  them  all.  Such  persons,  whatever 
may  be  their  conventional  position  or  ethnic  descent, 
whatever  the  color  of  their  skin,  the  form  of  their 
skull,  or  the  nature  of  their  hair,  are  singly  and  col- 
lectively inferior  to  the  uncultivated  and  oppressed 
and  hence  degraded  negro  ;  while  in  respect  of  jus- 
tice, manhood,  and  all  that  is  ennobling,  they  make 
no  approach  to  the  millions  of  industrious  and  intel- 
ligent farmers  and  free  yeomanry,  artisans,  and  me- 
chanics of  the  free  states,  still  less  with  the  higher 
manifestations  of  these  qualities  in  great  and  generous 
minds. 

Neither  in  the  Mosaic  record,  therefore,  nor  the  na- 
tive sense  of  morality,  still  less  in  science,  can  any 
support  be  found  for  the  fallacies  propounded  by  the 
apostles  of  American  slavery.  Science,  just  and  ele- 
vated in  its  intrinsic  nature,  deduces  conclusions  and 
establishes  laws  with  sublime  impartiality,  extenuat- 
ing naught,  and  setting  down  naught  in  malice.  The 


62  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

normal  character  of  every  science,  always  and  forever, 
is  emancipatory.  Science  emancipates  the  mind  from 
prejudices,  falsehoods,  and  superstitions,  and  from  the 
tyranny  exercised  over  man  by  the  elements  and  forces 
of  nature,  as  well  as  from  the  far  more  malignant  forces 
of  social  oppression.  It  is  doubtless  this  divine  char- 
acter of  true  science  which  makes  it  so  repulsive  to  the 
apostles  of  human  degradation. 


NABATHEANS.  63 

YI. 

NABATHEA1STS. 

AUTHOKITIES  : 

Lassen,  Quatremere,  Ldborde,  Oppert,  Chwolsohn,  Perceval,  etc. 

IN  the  gray  morning  of  time,  behind  the  obscurity 
hovering  over  the  origin  of  Assyria,  and  preceding 
even  the  first  great  epoch  of  Babylon,  dawns  the  fully- 
developed  Nabathean  civilization.  In  proportion  as 
scientific  investigation  imagines  it  has  reached  a  posi- 
tive epoch  in  the  ethnology  and  history  of  our  race,  a 
new  cloud  ever  rises  behind  it,  which  is  but  of  this 
service — unerringly  to  indicate  the  limits  of  the  space 
already  investigated.  Thus  legends,  traditions,  and 
tracings  sink  helpless  and  hopeless  into  mythus,  and 
the  investigator  is  lost  in  the  "dark  backward  and 
abysm  of  time."  The  Eastern  legends  hanging  over 
Fore- Asia  (or  the  lands  between  the  Himalayas  and 
Assyria),  present  traditions  of  epochs  and  civilizations 
which  had  traversed  the  periods  of  youth,  maturity, 
and  decline,  before  Brahmins,  Assyrians,  or  Hebrews 
even  dawned  on  the  historical  horizon. 

The  Nabatheans  are  supposed  to  have  been  Shem- 
ites  or  pure  Chaldeans.*  They  dwelt  in  ancient  Mes- 

*  In  contradistinction  to  Aryanized  Shemites  or  Chaldeans,  known 
as  Assyrians  and  Babylonians  of  the  second  epoch,  and  modern  Kurdes. 


64  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

opotamia,  between  the  Euphrates  and  the  Tigris,  and 
also  in  what  afterward  constituted  a  part  of  Syria 
and  Assyria ;  and  their  branches  or  colonies  extended 
to  Arabia  and  to  eastern  Mesopotamia.  They  were 
probably  the  primitive  white  dwellers  in  these  regionSj 
and  the  founders  of  Babylon  and  of  her  first — almost 
pre-historic — epoch  of  glory,  down  to  the  time  when 
they  were  conquered  by  the  Assyrians  or  by  Aryan- 
ized  Nabatheans  and  Chaldeans. 

According  to  ancient  eastern  writers,  they  invented 
and  taught  to  their  neighbors  the  art  of  tilling  the 
soil,  and  from  this  circumstance  they  are  said  to  have 
derived  their  name.  At  all  events  they  were  the 
primitive  cultivators  of  these  lands,  and  agriculture 
seems  to  have  been  their  principal  pursuit  and  mode 
of  livelihood.  This  highly-flourishing  Nabathean  civ- 
Ethnology  and  comparative  philology  everywhere  discover  similar  bi- 
furcations almost  at  the  sources  of  ethnic  life.  These  bifurcations  are 
explained  by  natural  growth  and  by  the  fusion  of  various  tribes  and 
nations.  Thus  Baktrya,  Persia  and  Media  present  us  with  Aryas  and 
Indo-Scythes  or  Aryanized  Tartars.  So,  too,  all  primitive  races  divide 
and  subdivide  in  the-  same  manner  within  themselves.  The  Shemites 
divided  into  Chaldeans  and  Canaanites,  and  then  into  Arabs,  Hebrews, 
etc.  The  Aryas  divided  first  into  two  groups — the  eastern,  from  which, 
in  turn,  sprang  the  Zend  and  Sanscrit-speaking  Aryas  or  Iranians  and 
Hindus — and  the  western  group,  ancestors  of  the  various  European 
races.  Of  these  latter,  one  branch  immigrated  into  Greece  and  Italy, 
there  giving  rise  again  to  lonians  and  Dorians,  Italiots  and  Latins,  and 
the  Greek  and  Latin  languages ;  while  another  formed  the  Gaels  or 
Gadheals  and  Kimri,  the  Gadhealic  and  the  Brizonec  being  the  principal 
dialects.  Then  we  have  their  offshoots — as  Belgse,  Kimbro-Belgas,  Fin- 
nic-Belgse,  etc.  So  also  the  Slavic  stem,  split  into  Serb,  Wendish,  etc. 


NABATHEANS.  65 

ilization  underlaid  the  Assyrian  and  second  Babylo- 
nian civilizations,  and  powerfully  influenced  the  prim- 
itive Hebrew  writers.  Arphaxad,  mentioned  in  Gen- 
esis, signifies  in  Chaldaic,  stronghold,  city,  civilization, 
and  this,  too,  at  the  earliest  so-called  patriarchal  epoch. 
To  the  Nabatheans  belongs  the  great  work  of  irrigat- 
ing Euphratia,  by  which  these  heretofore  barren  and 
uncultivated  plains  were  made,  for  more  than  forty 
centuries,  the  most  fertile  region  of  the  ancient  world. 
It  is  asserted,  too,  by  the  oldest  authorities,  that  their 
language  was  highly  developed  at  a  time  when  the 
other  Shemitic  tribes  and  nations  only  lisped  their 
rude  tongue,  or  attempted  to  spell  the  symbols  in- 
vented, in  all  probability,  by  the  Nabatheans.  Some 
attribute  to  them  the  invention  of  the  arrow-headed 
characters,  while  others  suppose  that  the  Assyrians 
(of  whom  hereafter),  first  devised  them,  or  at  all 
events,  first  applied  this  Tartar  invention  for  the  use 
and  preservation  of  the  IsTabathean  language.  Frag- 
ments from  the  writings  of  Kouthai — a  Nabathean, 
who  lived  long  before  the  destruction  of  Nineveh — 
show  that  most  of  the  sciences,  such  as  mathematics, 
astronomy,  chronology,  etc.,  were  cultivated  by  them 
to  a  high  degree,  and  that  they  were  great  lovers  of 
music  and  other  fine  arts. 

Their  historical  records  are  far  richer  and  more  com- 
plete than  any  other  existing  records  which 'relate  to 
those  distant  and  as  yet  all  but  incomprehensible 
epochs  and  events.  In  these  relics  many  details  of 
the  early  life  of  that  time  are  embodied,  principally 


66  SLAVBRY  IN  HISTORY. 

relating,  however,  to  agriculture,  and  from  which, 
doubtless,  the  Greek  writers,  as  Dionysius  of  Halicar- 
nassus,  and  Strabo,  derived  their  knowledge  of  the 
superiority  and  paramount  importance  of  Nabathean 
agricultural  science,  on  which,  as  already  remarked, 
their  whole  civilization  was  based.  Nowhere,  how- 
ever, in  these  venerable  Nabathean  fragments  is  slav- 
ery or  the  slave  ever  mentioned,  and  still  less  as  consti- 
tuting the  basis  of  domestic  husbandry  and  field  labor; 
but  freemen  and  freeholders  only  are  alluded  to  as  cul- 
tivating the  land  and  reaping  the  rewards  of  their 
toil ;  thus  furnishing  an  additional  and  most  forcible 
]-roof  that  human  slavery  is  not  coeval  with  the  exist- 
ence of  society. 

Indeed,  it  may  be  stated  as  a  general  rule,  clearly 
confirmed  by  history,  that  agriculture  never  can 
flourish  under  slave  labor,  nor  even  under  villanage. 
It  never  did  so  in  antiquity  and.it  never  has  done  so 
in  modern  times.  In  proportion  as  Egypt,  Syria  and 
Assyria  fell  a  prey  to  political  servitude  and  her  twin- 
sister,  or  rather  generator,  domestic  slavery,  did  their 
agriculture  deteriorate  and  decay.  In  proportion  as 
the  nations  of  modern  Europe  have  emerged  from 
slavery  and  serfdom,  has  agriculture  become  a  civiliz- 
ing agency,  progressive,  rational  and  scientific.  Eng- 
land, Germany,  France,  Switzerland,  Belgium  and 
Flanders,  are  living  witnesses  thereof;  and,  on  the 
other  side,  Poland,  Russia,  Hungary,  Bulgaria,  and 
the  Danubian  Principalities — all  possessed  of  the 
most  fertile  soils — scarce  emerge  from  social,  political 


NABATHEANS.  67 

and  rural  barbarity.  The  Moors  and  the  Moriscoes 
were  not  slaves  when  they  cultivated  Andalusia  in  a 
manner  never  equalled.  And  what  a  wide  difference 
between  the  agriculture  of  the  free  and  slave  sections 
of  the  United  States  !  and  that  too,  though  the  region 
of  slave  culture  enjoys  advantages  both  in  climate 
and  soil.  The  halting  and  uncertain  advances  made 
in  the  slave  country,  are  but  dimly  breaking  rays  from 
the  free,  enlightened  northern  states. 

Thus  do  the  oldest  and  the  newest  teach  one  lesson 
and  tend  to  one  result. 


ASSYRIANS  AND  BABYLONIANS.  69 

VII. 
ASSYRIANS  AND  BABYLONIANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Rawlinson,  Duncker,  Oppert,  M.  von  Niebuhr,  etc. 

THE  mighty  empire  of  the  Assyrians,  which  consti- 
tutes one  of  the  first  links  in  the  chain  of  positive 
history,  has  hitherto  been  best  known  by  the  great 
catastrophes  which  finally  closed  its  existence.  The 
Hebrew  Scriptures  testify  to  the  wealth,  the  luxury, 
and  the  military  power  of  the  Assyrians;  but  neither 
these  nor  the  fragments  in  other  ancient  historical 
writers,  dispel  the  obscurity  enveloping  the  interior 
organism  of  that  great  antique  people.  Neither  do 
the  outlines  of  Babylonian  history  given  by  Herodo- 
tus afford  much  insight  into  the  details  of  her  social 
structure. 

In  that  fore- world  which  history  has  not  yet  pene- 
trated, the  region  between  the  Mediterranean  sea  and 
the  head-waters  and  affluents  of  the  Euphrates  and 
the  Tigris,  formed  the  theatre  of  a  tumultuous  confu- 
sion of  races,  nations  and  civilizations,  which  has  no 
parallel  in  the  known  history  of  mankind.  Social 
and  ethnic  structures  of  the  most  heterogeneous  kind 
covered  those  regions,  with  their  various  creeds, 
theocracies,  municipalities  monarchies  and  despotisms 
of  every  degree. 


70  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

When,  about  fifteen  centuries  B.  a,  history  unveils 
the  empire  of  the  Assyrians  or  Ninevites,  their  do- 
minion extended  in  a  direct  line  from  the  head-waters 
of  the  Euphrates  and  Tigris  to  the  mouths  of  those 
rivers  ;  on  the  north-east,  also,  they  ruled  over  Media 
(thus  touching  the  Caspian),  and  from  thence  their 
dominion  stretched  across  Armenia,  southern  Cau- 
casus and  Georgia,  westward  to  the  mouth  of  the 
river  Halys  (the  modern  Kizil-Ermak),  in  the  Black 
Sea,  and  embraced  also  Palestine,  Phoenicia  and 
Kilikia.  As  the  dynasty  of  Ninus  once  ruled  over 
Lydia,  it  is  probable  that  the  Ninevite  empire  at  one 
time  extended  over  at  least  a  part  of  Asia  Minor,  as 
far  as  the  Egean  Sea. 

This  great  Assyrian  empire  rose  on  the  ruins  of 
Babylon,  which  was  once  her  master,  and  which  was 
also  far  superior  to  her  in  antiquity. 

History  has  preserved  the  names  of  some  of  the 
races  and  tribes  which  may  here  at  one  time  have 
dwelt  side  by  side,  but  which  were  subsequently  con- 
quered and  ruled  by  the  more  powerful  nation.  His- 
tory, we  say,  has  preserved  some,  and  comparative 
philology  is  constantly  disentangling  others  from  the 
chaos  of  antique  Mesopotamian  ethnology.* 


*  The  philological  analysis  of  the  arrow-headed  characters  and  in- 
scriptions discovered  in  the  ruins  of  Nineveh  (Khorsabad)  and  of  Baby- 
lon, and  on  various  other  spots  of  the  ancient  Persian  empire,  give  us 
some  idea  of  the  various  ethnic  elements  which  composed  the  Assyrian 
and  Babylonian  empires.  Probability,  founded  on  comparative  philolo- 
gy, attributes  the  invention  of  the  arrow-headed  characters  to  a  Tartar 


ASSYRIANS  AND   BABYLONIANS.  71 

The  Assyrian  and  Babylonian  empires  stand  recorded 
in  the  history  of  humanity  as  having  been  the  cradles 
of  Eastern  despotism  and  political  slavery.     How  thi 
terrible  tyranny  arose  in  Assyria  there  are  no  mean 
of  ascertaining.     Doubtless  there  were  a  number  of 
conspiring  causes,  just  as  many  rills  unite  to  form 
powerful  stream.     In  the  history  of  Rome,  fortunately 
we  shall  be  able  clearly  to  seize  the  genesis  of  her  des- 
potism, and  exhibit  the  germ  as  well  as  the  wreck  of 
her  social  structure.     Reasoning  from  all  historic  an- 
alogy, however,  it  may  safely  be  asserted  that  Assyr- 
ian despotism  was  generated  by  war,  while  political 
bondage  nursed  and  fostered  domestic   chattelhood. 
Evil  ever  reproducing  its  own  substance  and  shadow! 

The  social  and  domestic  economy  of  the  Assyrians 
must,  in  its  general  features,  have  been  similar  to  that 
of  the  Kabatheans  and  Hebrews.  In  the  course  of 

(Scythic)  people  or  race.  Transmitted,  in  all  likelihood,  from  people  to 
people;  increased,  fused  in  usage  and  application  by  various  languages 
and  dialects,  these  cuneiform  characters — as  used  for  Assyrian,  Babylo- 
nian and  Persian  inscriptions — are  now  ethnically  and  philologically  clas- 
sified into  two  main  divisions — the  Anaryan  and  the  Aryan.  The  Aryan, 
comprises  the  Old  Persian ;  the  Anaryau  of  the  Ninevite  relics  is  the 
result  of  ttiirteen  ethnic  and  philologic  combinations,  and  was  used  by 
the  five  following  peoples,  all  known  to  history.  1.  Medo-Scythians 
2.  Casdo-Scythians ;  3.  Susians ;  4.  Ancient  Armenians ;  5.  Assyrians 
The  following  are  the  thirteen  combinations:  1.  Pure  hieroglyphs; 
2.  Hieratic  signs — neither  yet  arrow-headed  ;  3.  Old  Scythic  or  Tartar 
arrow-heads;  4.  New  Tartar  (new  under  Assyria);  5.  Old  Susian 
6.  New  Susian;  1.  Old  Armenian;  8.  New  Armenian;  9.  Old  Assyrian -, 
10.  New  Assyrian  ;  11.  Old  Babylonian;  12.  New  Babylonian;  13.  De- 
motic Babylonian. —  Oppert 


72  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

time,  domestic  slavery  may,  to  some  extent,  have  been 
developed  in  both  empires ;  but  even  in  the  last  stages 
of  their  independent  existence,  it  could  not  have 
reached  that  terrible  point  it  attained  after  the  loss  of 
their  autonomy.  Assyria  and  Babylon  fell  by  the 
blows  of  nations  who  were  themselves  subdued  and 
politically  enslaved.  To  the  last,  however,  neither 
their  lands  nor  cities  were  ever  devastated  or  desolated. 
Their  civilization  remained  in  a  flourishmo:  condition 

O 

to  the  last,  arid  historically  it  stands  as  original.  But 
/  original  civilizations  are  never  germinated  under  the 
influence  of  domestic  chattelhood.  The  plains  of  the 
Euphrates  must  have  been  the  hive  of  a  rural  popu- 
lation whence  the  imperial  armies  were  supplied,  and 
these  supplies  could  not  have  been  in  the  form  of 
chattels.  In  ancient  cities,  manufactures  and  indus- 
try were  often  carried  on  by  slaves ;  but  when  domes- 
tic slavery  established  itself  in  the  rural  regions,  the 
national  forces  soon  became  palsied. 

The  tribes  and  countries  conquered  by  Assyria  and 
Babylon  were  simply  made  tributary  to  their  wealth 
and  'power.  Prisoners  of  war  were,  in  all  likelihood, 
disposed  of  in  the  same  manner  as  they  were  in 
Egypt,  and  as  was  the  custom  all  over  the  ancient 
world,  and  indeed,  for  several  centuries  in  Christen- 
dom— employed  in  the  public  works,  in  the  cutting 
of  those  canals  whose  traces  are  still  visible,  or  in 
raising  walls,  palaces  and  public  edifices,  all  of  which 
are  now  covered  mountain  high  with  the  dust  of 
ages.  Thus  Sargon  (or  Sargina),  for  example,  employ- 


ASSYRIANS  AND  BABYLONIANS.  73 

ed  prisoners  of  war  in  constructing  the  vast  palaces 
of  Khorsabad. 

Assyrian  and  Babylonian  history  records  repeated 
transportations  of  whole  populations  from  one  part  of 
the  empire  to  another.  The  condition  of  such  cap- 
tives on  becoming  colonists  has  already  been  explain- 
ed in  the  section  upon  the  "  Hebrews."  It  would 
seem  that  the  kings  of  Assyria  and  Babylon  first 
inaugurated  this  mode  of  wholesale  transportation, 
captivity  and  .  colonization.  Thus  Tiglath-Palassar 
deported  the  inhabitants  of  Damascus  to  Kur  in 
Georgia;  and  Assardan  sent  off,  en  masse,  Baby- 
lonians, Arkeans,  Susianians,  Elamites,  Persians  and 
Daheans  (Tartars),  some  north  and  others  south.  All 
such  transplantments  begot  destruction,  desolation 
and  the  breaking  up  of  homesteads ;  and  thus  fostered 
domestic  slavery,  facilitated  its  expansion,  and  in- 
creased its  fatal  influence  over  both  the  conquered 
and  the  conquerors.  And  finally,  they  prepared  the 
soil  for  that  poisonously  luxuriant  growth  of  slavery 
by  which  Mesopotamians  and  Syrians  became  the 
general  bondmen  of  classical  antiquity. 

After  the  destruction  of  the  Assyrian  capital  (Nin- 
eveh) by  the  revolted  nations,  Babylon  became  the 
centre  of  a  new  empire.  The  rule  of  Nabukudrussur 
(a  Chaldean  from  Babylon),  extended  from  the  moun- 
tains of  Armenia  to  the  Arabian  shores  of  the  Red 
Sea,  and  to  the  Persian  Gulf.  This  again  is  a  record 
of  perpetual  war,  and  was,  in  all  respects,  a  continua- 
tion of  the  Ninevitian  period  of  desolation  and  cap- 


74  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

tivity.  Prisoners  of  war  again  filled  the  capital,  and 
worked  at  the  walls  and  palaces  of  Babylon.  The 
rich  valleys  were  no  longer  cultivated  by  free  laborers, 
but  were  in  the  hands  of  large  slaveholders,  and  tilled 
by  their  gangs  of  slaves. 

Babylon  fell,  destroyed  by  war,  combined  with  po- 
litical and  domestic  slaveries,  and  she  transmitted  both 
diseases  to  her  destroyers. 


MEDES  AND  PERSIANS.  75 

VIII. 

MEDES  AND  PEKSLAJSTS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Zend  Avesta,  Vendidad,  Herodotus,  Lassen,  Pictet,  Duncker,  etc. 

THE  Medes  and  Persians,  or  Zend-speaking  Iranians, 
those  destroyers  of  the  Assyrian  and  Babylonian 
empires,  were  a  mighty  branch  of  the  great  family 
of  Aryas.  The  Iranians  left  the  common  home  of 
the  Aryas  at  a  period  so  distant  as  to  render  useless 
every  effort  toward  giving  it  possible  or  even  prob- 
able chronology.  They  settled  in  regions  called  by 
them  "  Lands  of  Iran,"  which,  np  to  the  present  day, 
constitute  Persia.  Some  investigators  assert  that  Iran- 
Persia  was  previously  occupied  by  Tartars ;  but  the 
earliest  traditions  preserved  in  the  Zend,  or  ancient 
speech  of  Zarathustra,  do  not  mention  any  struggles 
for  supremacy  between  the  races  as  having  taken 
place. 

The  Zend  Avesta,  the  oldest  traditional  record  of 
the  people  of  Iran,  presents  a  picture  of  the  primitive 
migrations  and  the  social  condition  of  the  Iranians. 
It  exhibits  them  as  divided  into  three  classes — priests, 
soldiers  and  farmers ;  though,  as  yet,  there  was  no 
such  thing  as  the  circumscription  of  caste.  It  wrould 
seem  that  the  fusion  with  the  Tartars — the  supposed 
aborigines  of  Iran — was  complete,  as  the  Zend  Avesta 


76  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

makes  no  mention  of  any  subjugated  people  or  lower 
class.  The  warriors  and  the  agriculturists  stood  on  a 
perfect  social  equality.  The  book  of  tradition  no- 
where mentions  serfdom,  slavery,  or  property  in  man. 
This  would  seem  to  authorize  the  conclusion  that 
among  the  early  Iranians,  property  in  man  was  un-, 
known.  Certainly,  at  all  events,  if  even  the  forms  of 
slavery  were  present,  they  were  in  such  abeyance  as 
to  escape  the  attention  of  Zarathustra  (Zoroaster),  the 
great  moralist  and  lawgiver  of  his  people,  who  lived 
long  after  the  epoch  of  the  early  wanderings,  and 
when  the  Iranic  nation  formed  a  well-organized 
society  on  Iran's  soil.  Zarathustra  considers  agricul- 
ture as  morally  and  socially  the  noblest  human  occu- 
pation ;  but  he  speaks  of  the  generous  labor  of  free- 
men, not  the  forced  drudgery  of  slaves. 

The  Yendidad  contains  frequent  allusions  to  the 
general  occupations  of  life,  and  is  especially  minute 
regarding  the  details  of  husbandry — its  wants,  modes, 
products  and  implements.  The  farmer  is  to  have  at 
least  a  team  of  draught  cattle,  a  harness  and  a  whip  ; 
a  plough,  a  hand-mill,  and  so  forth ;  but  there  is  no 
mention  whatever  of  a  slave  as  an  agricultural  re- 
quisite. The  homestead  of  an  Iranian  consists  of  a 
habitation,  a  storehouse,  a  cellar,  stables  for  horses, 
camels  and  cattle ;  but  the  records  have  no  allusion  to 
a  cabin  for  the  slaves.  The  Yendidad  also  describes 
how  dogs — almost  sacred  to  the  Iranians — are  to  be 
posted  to  watch  over  the  village  and  the  herds  ;  but 
nowhere  says  that  they  were  to  be  used  for  watching 


MEDES   AND   PERSIANS.  77 

and  hunting  slaves.  Yarions  operatives  and  artisans 
are  enumerated,  but  none  of  them  as  bond-servants  or 
as  working  under  compulsion. 

The  farmers,  peasants  and  operatives  of  Media  and 
Persia — so  admired  even  by  Xenophon  and  Plato —  \ 
thus  built  up  a  vigorous  state  and  society.  After  long 
centuries  of  existence,  however,  its  strength  was  un- 
dermined by  foreign  conquests,  by  luxury,  and  by 
political  and  domestic  slavery.  A  similar  phenome- 
non will  present  itself  again  and  again  in  the  course 
of  this  investigation.  When  the  Medes  overthrew 
the  Assyrian  empire,  they  became  infected  with  the 
dissolute  customs  of  their  former  masters.  The  houses 
of  the  wealthier  were  filled  with  domestic  slaves; 
though,  as  yet,  slavery  did  not  come  in  contact  with 
agriculture  or  the  industrial  pursuits,  and  so  spread 
like  a  blight  over  the  land. 

Domestic  slavery,  in  the  limited  sense  of  household 
servitude,  was  doubtless  .Itimately  introduced  into 
Per&La ;  but  never  was  Persian  held  as  chattel  on  his 
ancestral  soil.  Nor  yet  did  despotism,  or  political 
slavery,  exist  in  the  governmental  structure  of  the 
Iranians,  who,  led  by  Kyros  (Cyrus),  conquered  the 
whole  western  Asiatic  world.  Kyros  was  only  the 
first  among  his  peers,  and  was  all-powerful  only  as  a 
leader  and  commander.  He  had  not  yet  the  despotic 
power  of  Xerxes  and  other  and  later  scions  of  the 
Achaemenides ;  and  to  the  last,  even  to  the  conquests 
by  Alexander,  the  Iranic  social  structure  was  compar- 
atively free  from  domestic  slavery.  Nor  were  the 


78  SLAVEKY   IN   HISTORY. 

Persians  and  other  Iranian  tribes  ever  the  absolute 
political  slaves  of  their  own  kings. 

The  Persian  conquerors  #f  the  Asiatic  world  found 
domestic  slavery  more  or  less  developed  wherever 
they  penetrated.  Positive  information,  however,  is 
extremely  scanty  regarding  the  special  social  and  po- 
litical organization  of  the  Persians  after  Kyros  and 
under  Dareios.  The  rule  of  the  Achsemenides  extend- 
ed over  about  eighty  millions  of  men,  belonging  to 
various  races.  The  conquerors,  in  all  cases,  respected 
the  civil  and  social  organization  and  administration 
peculiar  to  the  subjugated  tribes  or  nations.  In  nu- 
merous instances,  the  sovereigns  of  conquered  states 
became  Persian  satraps  over  lands  they  once  ruled  in 
their  own  right.  As  satraps  they  were  possessed  of 
oppressive  authority,  had  the  power  of  life  and  death, 
of  forcing  exactions  and  levying  taxes.  But,  as  the 
Persian  kings  were,  to  the  last,  strict  observers  of 
Zarathustra's  precepts,  agriculture  always  continued 
to  be  the  most  favored  pursuit.  The  satraps  were  re- 
warded with  strict  reference  to  the  degree  in  which 
agriculture  nourished  and  the  population  grew  and 
prospered  in  their  respective  satrapies. 

During  the  long  rule  of  the  descendants  of  Dareios,  ; 
comparative  peace  prevailed  in  the  interior  of  the 
great  empire,  which  swept  from  the  Nile  almost  to  the 
Indus.  So  that  domestic  slavery  did  not  find  its  usual 
supplies  from  prisoners  of  war,  or  by  the  destruction 
of  small  properties  and  consequent  domestic  impov- 
erishment— those  terrible  sequels  of  wars  from  which 


MEDES  AND  PERSIANS.  79 

Fore-Asia  had  suffered  almost  uninterruptedly  for 
many  previous  centuries. 

For  these  and  other  reasons,  domestic  slavery  under 
the  Persian  rule,  although  sheltered  by  political  ser- 
vitude, had  but  small  growth  and  made  but  slow 
progress.  It  certainly  did  not  desolate  the  lands  with 
the  blight  and  barrenness  that  afterward  depopulated 
them  under  Roman  rule. 

The  tribute  paid  by  the  subdued  nations  to  the 
Persian  kings  and  their  court,  included  slaves — boys 
and  girls — but  in  a  limited  number.  The  slave-traffic 
existed  as  of  old ;  but,  in  all  probability,  the  supply 
of  the  human  merchandise  was  less  plentiful.  From 
political  slaves,  but  not  domestic  chattels,  it  was  that 
the  armies  were  recruited  which  crossed  the  Helles- 
pont and  invaded  Greece. 

But,  viewing  the  matter  in  the  gross  and  scope  of 
historical  development,  political  slavery  and  the  blight- 
ing effects  of  the  oppressive  despotism  to  which  the 
Persians  were  long  subjected,  may  be  looked  upon  as 
the  soil  out  of  which  grew  the  morbid  and  monstrous 
system  of  domestic  slavery,  just  as  external  influ- 
ences frequently  develop  and  foster  the  germs  of  a 
chronic  and  fatal  bodily  disease. 


ARYAS— HINDUS.  81 

IX. 
AEYAS— HINDUS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Lassen,  Wilson,  Weber,  Max  Miilkr,  Pictet,  Kuhn,  etc. 

THE  central  region  of  Baktria  was  in  all  probabil- 
ity the  cradle  of  the  Aryas,  the  common  progenitors 
of  all  the  races  and  nations  which  now  cover  Europe. 
In  times  anterior  to  the  great  pre-historic  division  and 
separation  of  the  Aryan  races,  they  probably  occupied 
the  whole  of  the  vast  region  stretching  from  the  Hin- 
du-Kush,  the  Belourtagh,  to  the  river  Oxus  and  the 
Caspian  Sea.  This,  too,  at  a  period  of  which  it  can 
only  be  said  that  time  existed. 

:  The  "antique  Aryas  led  a  pastoral  life.  The  original 
signification  of  the  words  in  the  European  languages 
denoting  family  and  social  relations,  as  well  as  the 
names  of  domestic  and  other  animals,  of  grains  and 
plants,  of  implements  of  husbandry  and  handicraft 
and  the  like,  is  elucidated  by  roots  found  in  Sanscrit, 
which  is  supposed  to  have  been  the  original  language 
of  the  Aryas,  or,  at  any  rate,  the  one  which  most 
completely  preserved  the  primitive  impress  of  the 
Aryan  character. 

"  Father  "  (in  Sanscrit,  pitri),  signifies  "  the  protect- 
ing one,  or  the  protector;"  "mother"  (Sanscrit,  matri), 
"she  who  regulates  or  sets  in  order;"  "daughter" 
4* 


82  SLAYEEY  IN  HISTORY. 

(duhitri),  "  the  milking  one  ;"  "  son"  (sunn),  "  the  be- 
gotten ;"  "  sister"  (vastri),  "  she  who  takes  care," — 
subauditur,  of  household  matters — also,  "  the  bearer 
of  a  new  family ;"  "  brother"  (brhatri],  "  the  helper, 
or  carrier ;"  "  youth"  (yavari),  "  the  defender.  So  also, 
"  horse"  (a$va),  signifies  "  swift,  rapid  ;"*  the  name  for 
the  "  bovine  "  genus,  bull  and  cow  (Sc.,  go,  gaus), 
"  to  sound  inarticulately,"  likewise  (ukskari)  "  fecund- 
ating," besides  other  names  with  other  significations; 
the  "  ovine  "  genus,  or  sheep  kind  (aw),  implies  "  the 
loved,  protected,"  etc. ;  the  "  dog "  ('cvan,  Jcvari), 
means  "  the  yelper,  barker ;"  but  he  has  also  other 
names  denoting  his  qualities,  as  sucoika,  "  spy,  in- 
former," krtagna,  the  "recognizing,"  or  "grateful 
one,"  etc. ;  "  goose,"  (hansa,  from  Sc.  has),  4  *  to 
laugh."  So  the  roots  for  the  general  names  of 
grains  and  fruits  are  to  be  found  in  the  Sanscrit ; 
thus,  ad,  "  to  eat ;"  adas,  "  nourishment ;"  gr,  "  to  de- 
vour," whence  garitra,  "grain,"  "rice,"  etc.  It  may 
be  noticed  that  derivatives  from  these  and  other  roots 
became  applied,  in  branch  languages,  to  various  spe- 
cial kinds  of  grain ;  thus,  "  oats,"  both  in  form  and 
signification,  is  easily  traced  to  a  Sanscrit  root.  So, 
too,  the  names  of  many  metals,  trees,  plants  and  wild 
animals,  have  their  roots  and  descriptive  meaning  in 
the  Aryan  or  Sanscrit  language ;  and  comparative 

*  The  Sanscrit  has  about  one  hundred  and  forty  appellations  for  tho 
"horse"  (mare  and  colt  included);  and  comparative  philology  demon- 
strates their  primitive  roots  to  be  preserved  in  almost  all  European 
languages. 


AEYAS — HINDUS.  83 

philology  gives  us  the  method  of  seizing  the  affilia- 
tions of  form  and  of  meaning. 

Words  of  the  character  pointed  out  and  their  prim- 
itive significations — constituting  the  foundation  of 
man's  family  and  social  existence — followed  the  vari- 
ous ethnic  branches  issuing  from  the  Aryan  and  ex- 
panding over  the  ancient  world.  But  no  root,  no 
name,  no  signification  is  to  be  found  for  a  "  servant" 
"bearing  the  meaning  of  "slave"  or  "chattel"  or  ex- 
pressive of  a  deprivation  of  the  rights  of  manhood  or 
of  human  dignity.  The  primitive  Aryan  mode  of 
life  was  naturally  patriarchal  or  clan-like,  and  the 
above-mentioned  words  show  that  household  and  rural 
functions  were  performed  by  the  members  of  the 
family.  What  has  been  already  said  in  another  divi- 
sion (see  "  Hebrews"),  applies  even  more  forcibly  to 
the  Aryas.  The  Sanscrit  word  ibha,  signified  "  fami- 
ly," "household,"  "servants,"  but  never  slaves  or 
chattels.  Both  its  sound  and  sense  are  still  perfectly 
preserved  in  the  Irish  ibh,  which  signifies  "  country," 
or  "  clan  ;"  not  enslaved  men  !  The  names  of  weap- 
ons, and  other  words  relating  to  warfare,  which  may 
be  traced  back  to  the  Aryan  speech,  prove  that  the 
Aryas  warred  with  other  tribes — perhaps  with  the  Tar- 
tars ;  and  all  such  foreign  enemies  were  comprehended 
under  the  collective  Sanscrit  denomination  of  Barbara, 
varvara,  or  "  barbarians."  But  even  here,  where 
we  should  most  look  for  it,  no  hint  or  trace  of  slavery 
can  be  found. 

The  attempt,  historically,  to  endow  certain  human 


84  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

families  or  races  with  special  fitness  or  capacity  for 
freedom  or  slavery — or  with  a  fatality  toward  the 
one  or  the  other,  or  toward  certain  fixed  social  and 
political  conditions — as  well  as  the  effort  to  divide  the 
human  family  into  distinct  physiological  or  psycholog- 
ical races — all  manifests  a  narrow  appreciation  of 
the  course  of  human  events;  it  evidences  a  very 
limited  knowledge  of  positive  history,  and  perhaps  a 
still  more  limited  philosophical  comprehension  of  its 
spirit.  If,  however,  such  classifications  had  any 
scientific  basis,  assuredly  the  Aryas  and  the  nations 
issuing  from  them  had  no  natural,  special  propensity 
either  to  be  slaves  or  slave-makers. 

It  will  be  hereafter  pointed  out,  that  among  the 
various  branches  of  the  Aryas,  or  what  are  called 
Indo-Europeans,  slavery  was  not  a  feature  of  their 
primitive  life,  but  was  the  result  of  a  long  subsequent 
epoch  of  moral  decay  and  degradation.  It  was  at  a 
comparatively  late  period  of  their  history  and  under 
precisely  the  same  conditions,  that  the  Romans  and 
Greeks  began  to  enslave  their  own  fellows.  So  was  it 
with  the  Gaels  or  Celts,  and  so  also  with  the  Slavi. 
The. Poles  were  free  from  serfdom  till  the  thirteenth 
Christian  century;  the  Russians  only  introduced  it 
toward  the  close  of  the  sixteenth — and  in  both  cases 
after  dissension,  war,  and  desolation.  The  Teutons 
alone  (Anglo-Saxons  included),  seen  in  the  light  of 
primitive  history,  had  slavery  in  their  household  and 
in  their  national  organism,  and  the  slaves,  too,  of  their 
own  race  and  kin. 


ARYAS — HINDUS.  „'  85 

The  Aryas  descended  the  slopes  of  Hindn-Kush  and 
the  Himalayas,  entering  the  region  of  the  Five  or  of 
the  Seven  Rivers  (Punjab),  wandered  along  tlie  river 
Jamuna,  611  the  line  between  Attock  and  Delhi,  suc- 
cessively spread  over  the  whole  region  between  the 
Indus  and  the  Ganges — and  here  begins  their  histori- 
cal existence  as  a  people.  In  the  course  of  this  long 
march  they  conquered  or  drove  before  them — seem- 
ingly without  any  great  trouble,  at  least  in  the  first  en- 
counters, the  aboriginal  occupants  of  the  Trans-Him- 
alayan countries ;  and  this,  too,  before  they  reached 
what  may  be  called  the  threshold  of  history.  Dis- 
cords and  wars  early  broke  out  among  them,  princi- 
pally caused  by  the  continual  pressure  of  northern 
immigrants  upon  the  possessors  of  the  fertile  coun- 
tries in  the  south — caused,  too,  by  the  struggles  for 
supremacy  between  families  or  dynasties,  when  the 
tents  of  the  patriarchs  had  expanded  into  populous 
tribes,  and  almost  into  nations  ;  and  also  by  the  strug- 
gles of  classes  created  in  the  effort  to  subjugate  the 
aboriginal  inhabitants,  especially  those  in  the  south- 
ern parts  of  India.  All  these  wars  took  place  at 
a  very  early  epoch,  and  elude  positive  chronologi- 
cal division.  Their  history,  as  well  as  that  of  the 
primitive  Aryan  or  Hindu  mode  of  life,  and  their 
earliest  spiritual  conceptions,  are  pictured  in  the  Ve- 
das,  which  form  the  background  of  the  whole  Indian 
world. 

The  gray  and  venerable  Yedaic  age  is  now  divided 
by  critics  into  four  periods:  the  Chhandas  period, 


86  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

the  Mantra  period,  the  Brahinana  period,  and  the 
Sutra  period. 

The  Chhandas  period  exhibits  the  purest  patriarchal 
and  peaceful  condition  of  the  family.  There  were 
then  no  priests  arid  no  division  of  classes  ;  the  father 
offered  up  simple  sacrifices  to  heaven,  and  the  simple 
hymns  and  songs  of  the  family  resounded  over  the 
offering.  If  the  household  contained  any  captive  of 
the  aboriginal  race,  such  a  one,  by  renouncing  his 
ancient  customs  and  creed,  and  accepting  the  lan- 
guage, the  faith  and  the  law  of  the  conqueror,  retain- 
ed life  and  comparative  liberty.  And,  moreover,  all 
ethnological  investigations  confirm  the  belief  that 
the  aborigines  of  India  were  of  the  negro,  or  what  is 
commonly  called  African  family.  On  this  American 
continent  the  kidnapped  and  enslaved  African  has 
accepted  both  the  creed  and  the  language  of  his  op- 
pressor— but  for  him  there  is  neither  liberty  ner  law. 

Not  to  enslave,  but  only  to  subdue — preserving,  at 
least  partially,  the  rights  of  the  conquered — was  the 
policy  of  the  Aryas  in  their  encounter  with  barba- 
rians. And  in  the  domestic  wars  of  tribes  and  dynas- 
ties which  yet  dimly  echo  through  the  second  or 
Mantra  period,  no  traces  of  the  enslavement  of  their 
conquered  enemies  are  to  be  found.  In  general,  the 
first  two  periods  not  only  do  not  show  any  shadow  of 
slavery  in  the  domestic  and  social  relations,  but  even 
the  division*  in  to  classes  or  castes  does  not  yet  make  its 
appearance.  During  the  third  or  Brahmana  period, 
the  Vedas  give  an  account  of  the  terrible  and  bloody 


ARYAS — HINDUS.  87 

struggle  which  ended  in  the  social  and  religions  vic- 
tory of  the  Brahmas,  or  Brahmins,  over  the  Ksha- 
triyas,  who  had  previously  formed  the  ruling  families. 

The  Brahmins  now  reorganized  the  religious  and 
political  structure  of  the  Hindus.  They  divided  soci- 
ety into  four  classes  or  castes  :  (it  is  to  be  noted  here, 
however,  that  some  modern  exegetists  assert  that  the 
true  meaning  of  the  Sanscrit  word  Varna,  for  "  caste," 
is  not  yet  clearly  apprehended).  These  four  castes  - 
were:  1.  The  Brahmins;  2.  The  Kshatriyas ;  3.  The 
Yaisyas ;  4.  The  Soudras,  or  Qudras.  The  first  three 
correspond  to  the  classification  already  mentioned  as 
existing  among  the  Iranians.  The  Qudras  were  the 
lowest  and  most  degraded  caste  ;  still  they  were  not 
enslaved,  not  the  property  of  any  other  caste,  not 
even  of  the  Brahmins — those  spiritual  and  political 
chiefs  of  the  Hind  as.  The  labors  of  agriculture  en- 
nobled even  the  hands  of  the  Brahmin,  and  could  not 
be  performed  by  slaves  nor  under  the  compulsory 
terrors  of  a  master  or  driver. 

As  the  word  Qudras  is  not  Sanscrit,  it  is  supposed 
that  it  was  the  ethnic  name  of  the  subdued  aborigines 
of  which  the  fourth  caste  was  composed.     The  off- 
spring of  a  Brahmin  and  a  Qudra  was  considered  of 
pure  blood.     The  Brahminic  law  authorized  the  eh-  /• 
slavement  of  persons   belonging   to  all  the  inferior7 
castes,  for  debt.     Slaves  may  also  have  been  made  in 
the  wars  with  the  southward  retreating  aborigines  and 
others ;  and  slaves  may  occasionally  have  been  sold 
in  the  markets,  but  their  number  must  have  been  very 


SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

in  significant.  Laws  for  the  servitude  of  the  Qudras — 
if  such  existed  even — must  very  soon  have  fallen  into 
disuse ;  for  when  Alexander  brought  Greece  and  Eu- 
rope into  contact  with  India,  the  astonished  Greeks 
found  scarcely  any  slavery  then  existing.  Several  of 
the  Greek  authors  even  assert  that  a  positive  law  pro- 
hibited any  kind  of  enslavement. 

Budha.  the  great  precursor  of  the  Christ,  was  moved 
to  tears,  affected  to  inspiration,  by  the  suffering  and 
oppression  which  resulted  from  the  division  of  society 
into  castes,  and  by  the  misery  of  the  poor,  who  were 
oppressed  by  the  rich  land-owner ;  but  among  the  so- 
cial and  moral  plagues,  Budha  and  his  disciples  enu- 
merate not  human  slavery.  As  far  as  the  history  of 
antiquity  is  known,  Budha  was  the  first  whose  relig- 
ious teaching  broke  through  the  narrow  conception  of 
nationality,  and  taught  universal  emancipation  and 
the  brotherhood  of  all  tribes  and  nations  of  men. 

The  oppression  of  the  poor  and  of  the  landless, 
which  then  existed  in  India,  exists  there  still.  It  was 
strengthened  by  the  terrible  Mahomedan  and  Mongol 
conquests,  and  by  the  iron  rule  of  the  British  East 
India  Company.  But  the  imposition  by  the  Mahom- 
edans  and  Mongols  of  an  oriental  despotism  over  the 
Hindus  did  not  implant  domestic  chattelhood,  nor  did 
the  English  tax-gatherers  ever  cause  Hindu  humanity 
to  be  exposed  for  sale  in  the  markets  or  bazaars. 


CHINESE.  89 

X. 
CHINESE. 

AUTHORITIES : 

The  Slots,  Kaeuffer,  Gutzla/,  etc. 

CHINA  belongs  to  the  present  and  to  the  remotest 
past  of  the  Asiatic  world.  The  historical  existence 
of  China  and  her  civilization  are  at  least  coeval  with 
that  of  Egypt  and  of  Assyria,  perhaps  older  than  that 
of  the  Aryas. 

Some  geological  investigators  affirm  that  the 
table-land  inclosed  between  the  northern  slopes  of 
the  Himalayas,  the  Kuenlun,  the  desert  of  Gobi— 
which  is  said  to  be  older  than  the  formation  of  the 
Himalayas — the  Heavenly  or  Blue  mountains,  and 
the  Altai,  was  the  first  land  which  rose  from  the 
waters,  and  that  therefore  it  was  the  first,  arid  perhaps 
the  only  place  in  the  north,  where  man  appeared. 
This  admitted,  the  probability  is,  that  from  that  first 
human  family  issued  a  race  bearing  to-day  various 
appellations,  as  the  Yellow,  the  Altaic,  Turanian, 
Scythic,  Finnic,  Mongolian  and  Tartar — which  is  the 
last  general  denomination  adopted  by  science,  at  least 
for  the  branches  occupying  central  Asia,  and  reach- 
ing to  the  frontiers  of  Europe  and  the  descendants  of 
the  Aryas.  The  first  immigrants  to  China  from  the 
Kuenlun  probably  followed  the  current  of  the  Yellow 


90  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

river ;  and  it  seems  that  the  aborigines  retired  before 
the  invaders,  .or  perhaps  the  new  yellow  settlers 
mixed  with  the  primitive  occupants.  In  the  southern 
parts  of  China,  in  the  mountains  of  the  interior,  are 
still  found  tribes  of  dark-colored  men  resembling  the 
negroes  or  the  Pacific  islanders,  and  using  notched 
characters  similar  to  those  used  by  the  Malays. 

Agriculture  seems  to  have  been  the-. sacred  occu- 
pation of  these  yellow-hued  settlers  along  the  banks 
of  the  Yellow  river — as  it  was  in  the  valley  of  the 
Nile,  of  the  Euphrates,  and  on  the  plains  of  Iran.  Ev- 
erywhere the  origin  of  agriculture  is  lost  in  the  night 
of  time,  and  Quain  or  Cain — that  is,  the  kernel,  the 
young,  the  generating,  etc.,  the  husbandman  of  the 
Scriptures — is  many  thousand  years  older  than  Abra- 
ham, the  wandering  and  slave-holding  patriarch.  The 
oldest  Chinese  records  show  agriculture  to  have  been 
the  special  occupation  of  the  father  of  a  family,  of 
the  chief  of  a  clan,  and  then  of  the  emperor  of 
the  entire  nation.  With  his  own  hands  he  directs  the 
plough — therefore  the  plough  could  not  have  been 
desecrated  by  the  hands  of  a  slave.  And  it  was  not. 
In  the  family,  in  the  domestic  as  well  as  in  the  na- 
tional life,  slavery  first  dimly  appears  only  about  the 
thirteenth  century  B.  c. 

In  the  remotest  time,  labor  was,  as  it  is  now,  the 
basis,  the  cement  and  the  soul  of  the  Chinese  social 
and  political  life  and  growth — and  by  labor  I  mean,  in- 
tellectual and  manual  labor  in  its  most  varied  depart- 
ments and  developments.  No  classes,  no  castes, 


CHINESE.  91 

existed  in  the  old  primitive  times ;  and  perhaps,  during 
many  thousand  years,  no  dynasties.  The  best  and  ablest 
person  was  selected  as  the  chief  and  ruler:  all  the 
offices  or  functions  were  obtained  by  intellectual  fac- 
ulty and  by  superiority  of  knowledge,  but  not  inherit- 
ed ;  and  the  same  system  prevailed  throughout  all  the 
occupations  and  pursuits  of  life.  No  labor  whatever 
was  degraded  or  degrading ;  it  was  carried  on  by  men 
free  and  equal,  and  in  principle  recognized  as  such. 

In  China,  as  everywhere  else,  slavery  appeared  as 
a  disease  in  the  social  body.  ,It  was  generated  by 
war  and  crime.  Prisoners  of  war  and  condemned 
criminals  became,  so  to  say,  slaves  of  the  state,  which 
used  them  for  public  labors  or  hired  them  out  to  pri- 
vate individuals.  The  highest  officers  of  state,  per- 
sons over  seventy  years  old,  and  children,  could  not 
be  condemned  to  slavery,  excepting  children  exposed 
or  abandoned  by  their  parents.  Slaves  hired  by  pri- 
vate individuals  were  only  used  as  helps  or  servants  in* 
households  and  families.  But  most  of  the  servants 
were  always  freemen — they  are  so  now;  and  slaves 
never  were  used  in  agriculture  or  in  the  different  han- 
dicrafts. The  land  being  generally  considered  as  the 
property  of  the  state,  or  of  the  emperor,  the  sovereign 
divided,  distributed  it,  under  certain  conditions  and  ser- 
vitudes, for  tribute  in  money  or  kind,  etc.  But  slaves 
are  not  mentioned  among  the  various  objects  enumer- 
ated as  constituting  the  tribute.  The  increase  of  pop- 
ulation generated  poverty,  and  paupers  sold  and  still 
sell  themselves  or  their  children  into  slavery.  Repeated 


92  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

domestic  or  internecine  wars,  recorded  at  a  very  distant 
historical  epoch,  were  among  the  prominent  agencies  in 
increasing  poverty.  Impoverished  persons  and  those 
deprived  of  their  homes  either  sold  themselves  or  be- 
came serfs  attached  to  the  soil,  but  not  chattels.  As 
serfs  their  legal  condition  and  denomination  is  preserved 
in  the  books  written  about  the  twelfth  century  B.  c., 
by  Ma-tuan-lin — they  are  named  usurped  families  or 
usurpees.  Even  after  the  conquest  by  the  Mautschou 
Tartars,  chattelhood  did  not  get  hold  of  the  political 
structure,  nor  did  it  absorb  the  agricultural  and  indus- 
trial domestic  economy  of  the  Chinese.  With  the  ex- 
ception of  the  reigning  family,  no  social  position  or 
function  is  privileged  as  hereditary ;  and  in  the 
same  way,  accidental  slavery  was  not  transmitted 
to  the  children  of  the  enslaved.  Their  condition 
was  and  is  controlled  and  regulated  by  law,  which 
watches  over  the  property  of  the  state.  Among  the 
numerous  domestic  wars  there  are  never  recorded  any 
revolts  of  slaves — an  evidence  of  their  very  limited 
number. 

Over-population  generated  and  generates  the  most 
terrible  and  varied  oppressions  and  miseries ;  but  all 
of  them  lose  their  sting  when  compared  with  chattel- 
hood.  Over-population  and  misery  generated  the  so- 
called  coolie-system,  which  in  principle  is  based  on 
voluntary  indenture.  The  reckless  cruelties  and  the 
numerous  infamies  characterizing  the  manner  in  which 
the  coolie  trade  is  carried  on,  is  evidence  of  the  utter 
moral  degradation  and  depravity  of  the  white  civil- 


CHINESE.  93 

ized  Christian  traders,  and  the  inefficiency  of  their  re- 
spective governments. 

The  Chinese  civilization  is  commonly  looked  down 
upon  from  the  heights  of  narrow-minded  presumption 
and  ignorance.  About  three  thousand  years  B.  c., 
public  schools  existed  in  China,  and  a  full  scientific 
and  material  culture  prevailed  there.  Chinese  records 
(among  them  the  Books  of  the  Sehu  Kings),  going 
back,  perhaps,  as  far  as  two  thousand  five  hundred 
years  B.  c. — contain  the  most  correct  and  detailed 
statistical  accounts  of  tribute,  and  give  most  reli- 
able geographical  notions  of  China,  and  of  the  sub- 
dued and  neighboring  countries — notions  superior  in 
exactitude  to  all  similar  records  transmitted  from 
classical  antiquity.  The  Chinese  lived  in  houses,  in 
orderly  communities,  were  humanized,  polished,  fa- 
miliar with  the  sciences,  industries,  and  all  kinds  of 
refinements,  at  a  time,  and  during  countless  centuries, 
when  the  races  of  northern  Europe — prominently 
the  Slavi,  the  Germans,  the  Anglo-Saxons  included 
— did  not,  in  all  probability,  even  understand  how 
to  construct  huts,  and,  as  savages,  roved  about  in 
the  wilderness. 

In  a  work  written  by  Prince  Tscheu-Kong,  about 
one  thousand  one  hundred  years  B.  c.,  are  given  the 
most  minute  details  of  the  then  existing  organ- 
ization of  the  empire.  The  administrative  mechan- 
ism of  that  distant  epoch  finds  no  equal  in  the 
whole  history  of  governments  or  of  nations.  Sev- 
eral thousand  years  ago  the  empire  was  admiuis- 


94  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

tered  by  six  supreme  state  departments,  each  with 
perfectly  defined  attributes,  each  subdivided  into 
special  branches,  with  directors  and  all  orders  of 
lower  officials  and  functionaries.  Chinese  civiliza- 
tion passed  its  periods  of  youth  and  maturity  many 
thousand  years  ago ;  and  its  senility  has  not  yet 
reached  total  decrepitude.  It  crumbles  not  to  pieces 
even  now  in  its  comparatively  disjointed  and  disorgan- 
ized condition. 

~No  one  can  consider  China  in  any  way  a  model 
social  organism ;  but  its  duration  is  marvellous  and 
unequalled  in  the  history  of  the  race.  The  absence  of 
hereditary  privilege  and  of  chattelhood  as  social  or 
religious  institutions,  accounts,  among  other  reasons, 
for  this  unique  phenomenon.  With  all  its  drawbacks 
and  defects,  this  long-lived  civilization,  with  its  schools, 
its  general  intelligence,  its  thousands-of-years  old  rou- 
tine, compares,  in  many  respects,  favorably  with  that 
in  the  Southern  States  calling  itself  Christian,  which, 
having  partly  inherited  the  great  European  develop- 
ment, and  receiving  influences  from  the  free  sections 
of  the  Union,  has,  nevertheless,  for  the  last  thirty  or 
forty  years,  turned  on  its  own  crooked  tracks,  and, 
now  prohibits,  under  severe  penalty,  schools  for  the 
children  of  its  field  laborers,  whom  it  keeps  in  bond- 
age. It  sighs  also  for  a  further  extension  of  oli- 
garchic privileges,  and  for  the  enslavement  of  all 
human  labor:  re-enslaves  the  free  or  expels  them; 
legalizes  and  sanctifies  the  sum  of  all  social  villanies : 
whose  last  word  is  the  Lynch  law,  and  the  reckless,. 


CHINESE.  95 

lawless  persecution  of  free  speech  and  even  of  free 
thought ;  while  assassination  becomes  more  and  more 
frequent. 

In  the  most  ancient  Asiatic  world,  the  primitive 
societies  generally  had  analogous  beginnings,  what- 
ever may  have  been  the  regions  and  climates  cradling 
them,  whatever  the  difference  of  time,  epochs,  or 
race-characteristics.  Analogous  events  and  conditions 

O 

evoked  similar  developments  in  the  primitive  men. 
The  manifestations  of  man's  intellectual  and  physical 
activity  were  everywhere  spontaneous :  a  transmission 
of  the  various  rudiments  of  civilization  cannot  logic- 
ally be  admitted. 

Osiris,  Cain,  Yao,  were  urged  by  like  necessities, 
when  they  inaugurated  agriculture  in  Egypt,  in  Eu- 
phratia,  or  along  the  valleys  of  the  Yellow  river.  On 
the  Nile,  on  the  Euphrates,  on  the  Ganges,  on  the 
Hoang-ho,  man — red  or  black,  white  or  yellow — ob- 
served nature,  utilized  even  the  inundations,  regu- 
lated and  embanked  the  beds  of  rivers,  cut  canals  and 
trenches  to  irrigate  the  parched  soil.  Everywhere — 
and  certainly  without  imitating  each  other — but 
urged  by  surrounding  circumstances,  man  worked, 
•toiled,  constructed  habitations  with  the  materials  at 
hand — stone  in  Egypt;  bricks,  plaster,  wood,  etc.,  in 
Bab}7 Ionia  and  China ;  raised  cities  in  rich  and  fertile 
plains,  erected  edifices,  and  invented  characters  and 
signs  to  fix  and  to  transmit  to  others  ideas,  notions  and 
facts.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  special  nature 
and  form  of  these  characters,  whether  hieroglyphics 


96  SLAVERY   IN    HISTORY. 

or  phonetics,  etc.,  undoubtedly  they  were  original  and 
not  transmitted  creations.  These  inventions  arose 
at  places  separated  by  distances  then  almost  impas- 
sable, by  the  same  necessities  and  thoughts,  by  obser- 
vation and  imitation  of  nature,  and  by  many  other 
inner  and  outer  promptings  and  circumstances. 
The  rudiments  of  mathematics,  astronomy,  and  other 
sciences,  were  created  by  this  contact  of  man's  mind 
with  nature ;  and  it  is  difficult,  if  not  impossible,  to 
admit  that  Egyptians  or  Chaldeans  were  the  instruc- 
tors of  the  Aryas  or  of  the  Chinese,  or  vice  versa. 

Of  late  an  attempt  has  been  made  to  justify  Amer- 
ican chattelhood  by  the  fact  that  at  the  birth  of 
Christ,  half  of  the  population  of  the  Roman  empire 
— about  sixty  millions — groaned  under  domestic  slav- 
ery. This  estimate  may  be  below  the  true  mark ;  but 
the  humanity  whose  emancipation  or  redemption  was 
to  be  accomplished,  was  not  limited  to  the  Roman 
world.  For,  from  Iran  and  the  Indus  to  the  Kuenlun 
ridges,  dwelt  a  population  five  or  six  times  greater 
than  that  which  populated  the  Roman  empire,  and 
that,  too,  almost  unvisited  by  that  terrible  social 
plague  which  is  now  represented  as  being  a  divine 
blessing.  Whatever  may  have  been  the  other  mul- 
tiform social  calamities  which  befell  them — wars, 
massacres,  destructions,  impoverishments,  and  deso- 
lations— are,  after  all,  but  transient  visitations;  while 
American  chattelhood,  as  devised  by  its  apostles,  eter- 
nally degrades  both  master  and  chattel. 


GREEKS.  97 

XI. 
GKEEKS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

PolyUus,  Grote,  0.  Mutter,  Beclch,  Curtius,  Clinton,  Finlay,  etc. 

AT  the  foot  of  the  Julian  Alps,  above  the  head  of 
the  Adriatic,  the  branch  of  the  Aryas  which  peopled 
Greece  separated  from  their  brethren  who  wandered 
into  Italy.  Keeping  to  the  coast  of  Adria,  the  se- 
ceders  reached  the  mountainous  gorges  of  Epirus  and 
the  plains  of  Thessaly.  From  the  southern  slopes  of 
the  Cambunian  mountains  and  of  Olympus,  they,  in 
course  of  time,  spread  over  Greece  and  Peloponnesus. 
Such  at  least  are  the  results  of  the  most  recent  re- 
searches concerning  the  pioneers  whose  labors  pre- 
pared that  region  for  the  part  it  afterward  played  in 
history.  They  cleared  the  forests,  drained  the  marshes, 
cut  canals  to  let  out  the  stagnant  waters  in  mountain- 
basins  so  common  in  Greece ;  they  regulated  the  cur- 
rents of  rivers  and  streams,  made  the  soil  arable,  and 
the  region  fit  for  man  and  for  further  culture.  These 
primitive  cultivators  of  the  valleys  of  Greece,  and 
builders  of  the  Cyclopean  structures,  called  them- 
selves, or  were  called  by  others,  Pelasgi  (that  is,  those 
issuing  from  black  soil,  etc.),  and  are  regarded  as  the 
earliest  occupants  of  Hellenic  soil.  They  were  the 
first  settlers,  and  most  probably  offshoots  of  the  same 
original  stem  whose  successive  branches  mingled  with 
5 


98  SLAVERY  IN"  HISTORY. 

the  Felasgi,  or  crowded  them  out  and  took  their  place 
in  history  as  Achives,  Hellenes,  and  lonians— the  last 
being  considered  by  ancient  as  well  as  by  modern 
writers  as  having  been  the  autochthones  of  Attica 
and  of  other  neighboring  regions.  To  these  Pelasgi 
and  other  primitive  occupants,  to  their  laborious  pur- 
suits and  occupations,  to  their  simple  social  structure, 
as  well  as  to  the  essentially  primitive  social  life  of 
the  Greeks,  Herodotus  refers — asserting  that  at  the 
outset  slavery  was  unknown  in  Greece,  and  especially 
in  Attica. 

The  Pelasgian  epoch  was  succeeded  by  what  is  com- 
monly called  the  legendary  or  heroic  age.  In  this 
Homeric  epoch  free  yeomen  or  agriculturists  own 
and  till  the  soil ;  all  the  handicrafts  and  profes- 
sions are  free.  Carpenters,  smiths,  leather-dressers, 
etc.,  were  all  freemen,  and  so  also  were  the  bards  and 
"the  leeches"  (a  highly  esteemed  class  in  primitive 
Greece).  But  wealth  already  began  to  accumulate, 
and  the  farms  of  the  more  fortunate  were  tilled  by 
poor  hired  freemen  called  Thetes. 

The  geographical  conformation  of  Greece  furnished, 
as  it  still  does,  a  natural  incitement  to  war  and  piracy. 
Both  formed  prominent  characteristics  of  the  heroic 
times.  Phoenician  vessels  visited  the  shores,  and 
Phoenician  settlements  and  factories  were  built  at 
various  points.  These  traffickers,  perhaps,  taught 
the  Greeks  that  the  feeble  may  be  profitably  enslaved 
by  the  strong,  or  at  any  rate  they  were  the  cus- 
tomers of  the  Greek  pirate. 


GREEKS.  99 

The  general  Greek  word  for  slave  explains  the 
origin  of  slavery.  Dmoos  and  dmoe^  slave,  go 
back  to  dmao  or  damao,  to  subdue,  to  subjugate, 
and  so  bear  witness  of  war  and  violence  either 
between  individuals,  or  between  clans,  tribes,  and 
districts,  and  then  of  incursions  into  distant  lands. 
Slavery  became  an  object  of  luxury,  but  not  of 
social  and  economical  necessity.  It  was  confined  to 
the  dwelling  of  the  chiefs  and  the  sovereign ;  but 
did  not  invade  the  whole  community.  Leaders  of 
freebooting  expeditions  seized  every  kind  of  booty, 
taking  as  many  prisoners  as  they  could  on  sea  and  on 
land.  If  the  expedition  or  foray  failed,  the  chief 
and  his  followers  became,  in  their  turn,  prisoners 
and  slaves.  The  prisoners  were  employed  for  do- 
mestic use  within  the  precincts  of  the  dwelling,  as 
servants,  shepherds,  etc.,  or  were  sold  or  exchanged 
for  others.  The  Phoenicians  sold  Asiatics  or  Libyans 
to  Greeks  and  to  Pontian  barbarians,  and  received  in 
exchange  the  prey  made  by  Greeks  in  Greece  or  in 
Pontus.  The  Phoenicians  occasionally  kidnapped 
women  and  boys  and  sold  them  to  Asiatics,  Africans, 
and  Celt-Iberians.  Then,  as  everywhere  throughout 
remotest  and  classical  antiquity,  many  of  the  enslav- 
ed had  previously  belonged  to  the  higher  and  even 
the  highest  conditions  in  their  respective  tribes,  na- 
tions, or  communities.  So  Eumseus,  the  swineherd 
of  Ulysses  immortalized  by  Homer,  was  the  son 
of  a  chief  of  some  island  or  district,  who,  having 
been  kidnapped  by  Phoenicians,  was  sold  to  Laertes. 


100  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

In  mediaeval  times,  likewise,  the  prisoner  taken  on  the 
battle-field  and  kept  for  ransom,  if  not  for  service,  often 
was  superior  in  birth  and  station  to  his  keeper.  ~No 
snch  social  classifications,  however,  are  intrinsic  or 
normal,  but  only  conditional,  relative,  and  conven- 
tional, even  when  inherited.  Logically  they  have 
the  same  signification  and  value  in  a  well-graduated 
society,  with  its  castles,  palaces,  charters  and  other 
privileges,  as  oil  plantations  or  among  roving  nomads 
and  savage  tribes.  And  thus,  among  the  Southern 
slaves,  descending  from  prisoners  of  war  or  from  kid- 
napped Africans,  there  may  be  several  of  a  purer 
aristocratic  lineage  than  many  of  their  drivers,  even 
if  the  latter  were  F.  F.  Y. 

Enfranchisement,  manumission,  and  ransom  were 
largely  practised  in  legendary  Greece.  The  children 
of  freemen  by  slave-women  were  free,  and  equal  to 
those  of  legitimate  birth.  Most  of  the  wars  and  expe- 
ditions during  the  heroic  or  Achivian  piratical  epoch, 
were  made  for  the  sake  of  kidnapping  men  and  wo- 
men, to  sell  or  to  exchange  with  the  Phoenicians  for 
various  luxuries.  Such  was  the  general  origin  of 
slavery  at  the  time  when  history  throws  its  first  rays 
on  the  Grecian  world. 

Many  defend  slavery  on  the  plea  that  it  softened 
and  softens  the  results  of  wars  and  inroads;  that  pris- 
oners, once  slaughtered,  are  preserved  for  the  sake  of 
being  sold  into  slavery.  But  already,  during  the  so- 
called  heroic  age  of  Greece,  wars  and  forays  were 
made  for  the  express  purpose  of  getting  captives 


GREEKS.  101 

or  for  kidnapping.  The  robber  or  pirate  was  always 
sure  to  find  a  buyer  for  his  booty,  otherwise  he  would 
have  had  no  inducement  to  act.  And  thus  slavery,  in- 
stead of  softening  war,  was  its  very  source.  The  Greeks 
of  the  heroic  age  were  incited  to  make  inroads  and  dep- 
redations by  the  facility  and  security  they  had  of  profit- 
ably disposing  of  their  captives  by  selling  them  into 
slavery.  The  bloody  drama  played,  many,  many 
centuries  ago,  in  Peloponnesus  and  Greece,  on  the 
Ionian  and  Egean  seas,  and  among  the  islands  of  the 
Archipelago,  is  repeated  to-day  on  both  sides  of  the 
Atlantic — on  African  and  on  American  shores  and 
islands.  The  tribes  in  Africa  war  w^ith  each  other, 
destroy  and  burn  towns  and  villages,  expressly  and 
exclusively  because  they  find  customers  for  slaves 
among  Christians,  and  among  self-styled  civilized,  v 
humanized  white  men.  Thus  much  for  the  assertion 
that  American  slavery  contributes  to  soften  the  fate 
of  prisoners  of  war  in  Africa,  and  humanizes  the  sav- 
ages. It  bestializes  them,  together  with  their  pirat- 
ical purchasers  and  their  Southern  patrons.  The 
analogy  holds  good  here,  at  a  distance  of  many  thou- 
sand years  and  many  thousand  miles,  among  differ- 
ent social  conditions,  in  a  different  civilization,  and 
in  the  higher  moral  development  of  the  white  man. 

New  invasions  successively  rolled  over  the  valleys 
of  Hellas  ;  they  changed  considerably  the  social  con- 
dition of  the  populations,  expelling  or  subduing  many 
of  the  former  occupants  and  yeomen.  From  the  north, 
from  Tliessaly,  poured  Hellenes,  Heraclides,  and  Do- 


102  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

rians,  west  and  south,  principally  into  the  Pelopon- 
nesus. Henceforth  the  whole  Greek  family  was 
represented  in  history  by  two  cardinal  social,  political, 
and  intellectual  currents,  through  the  so-called  Doric 
and  Ionic  races. 

In  Thessaly,  serfdom — but  not  chattelhood — seems 
to  have  been  anciently  established.  New-comers 
subdued  the  earlier  tillers  of  the  soil.  The  subdued 
became  villeins,  bondsmen,  adscripti  gleboB.  Such 
dependent  cultivators  were  the  Thessalian  Penestae, 
who  paid  over  to  the  landowners  a  certain  propor- 
tion of  the  produce  of  the  soil ;  furnished  those 
retainers  by  which  the  families  of  the  chiefs,  or 
the  more  powerful,  were  surrounded,  and  served  in 
war  as  their  followers.  But  they  could  not  be  sold 
out  of  the  country ;  they  had  a  permanent  tenure  in 
the  soil,  and  enjoyed  family  and  village  relations. 
Perhaps  more  than  twenty  centuries  afterward,  this 
was  also  the  condition  of  the  rustics  all  over  western 
and  mediaeval  Europe,  and  in  some  parts  this  condi- 
tion even  lasted  down  to  our  century — everywhere 
similar  events  generating  emphatically  analogous  re- 
sults and  conditions.  The  holdings  of  the  Thessalian 
Penestae  were  protected  by  the  state,  whose,  subjects 
they  were,  and  not  chattels  of  the  individual  propri- 
etors. The  Thessalian  and  Doric  invaders  and  con- 
querors imposed  a  similar  yoke  wherever  they  were 
victorious  and  finally  settled.  The  last  Doric  and  Her- 
aclidic  invasion,  which,  culminated  in  the  institutions 
and  history  of  Sparta,  subdued  the  former  occupants 


GREEKS.  103 

of  Peloponnesus,  some  of  whom  were  likewise  of  Doric 
origin.  Of  such  origin,  in  considerable  proportion, 
were  the  renowned  Helots.  So,  also,  in  course  of  time, 
the  descendants  of  the  companions  of  Achilles  became, 
in  the  north,  serfs  under  certain  conditions  of  a  more 
liberal  nature;  while  others,  descending  from  the 
companions  of  Agamemnon  and  Menelaus,  became 
Sparta's  Helots. 

The  condition  of  the  Helots,  in  many  respects,  was 
similar  to  that  of  the  Penestae  of  Thessaly.  They  could 
not  be  sold  beyond  the  borders  of  the  state,  not  even 
by  the  state  itself,  which  apportioned  them  to  citizens, 
reserving  to  itself  the  power  of  emancipation.  They 
lived  in  the  same  villages  which  were  once  their  own 
property,  before  conquest  transformed  the  free  yeomen 
or  peasants  into  bondsmen.  The^tajg.  employed  the 
Helots  in  the  construction  of  public  works.  Their  fate, 
however  terrible  it  may  have  been,  was  altogether 
within  the  law,  whereas  other  domestic  slaves  in 
Greece,  just  like  those  in  the  Southern  States,  depended 
upon  the  arbitrary  will  of  individuals.  The  Spartan 
law  had  various  provisions  for  the  emancipation  of  the 
Helots.  They  served  in  the  army  and  fought  the 
great  battles  of  the  Lacedemonians.  Will  the  South 
intrust  their  chattels  with  arms  and  drill  them  into 
military  companies? 

Sparta  was  the  seat  of  an  oligarchy,  which  owned 
the  greater  part  of  the  lands  of  Laconia,  and  kept  in 
dependency  the  other  autochthonous  tribes,  which  in 
Borne  way  or  other  escaped  the  fate  of  the  Helots. 


104  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

Such  were  the  Periokes,  enjoying  certain  political  and 
full  civil  rights.  But,  in  the  course  of  events,  the  oli- 
garchy tried  to  violate  those  rights,  and  the  Periokes 
joined  Epaminondas  against  Sparta,  facilitating  its  sub- 
jugation, just  as,  centuries  afterward,  they  joined  Fla- 
minius  and  the  Romans  against  their  Spartan  masters. 
In  Lacedemonia,  as  in  Attica,  there  existed  small  land- 
holders, called  gamori  or  geomori^  and  others  called 
autougroi — rustics  possessing  petty  patches  of  land, 
or  farming  small  parcels  owned  by  large  proprietors. 
Just  so  in  the  South  the  large  plantations-  are  sur- 
rounded by  poor  whites,  by  "  sand-hillers,"  etc.,  some 
of  them  owning  small  patches,  generally  of  poorer  soil ; 
others  altogether  homeless  and  landless.  Subsequently 
these  geomori,  etc. — poor,  free  populations  and  their 
homesteads — were  almost  wholly  engulfed  by  large 
plantations  and  domestic  slavery.  This  was  the  work 
of  time,  as  in  her  great  days  scarcely  any  chattel  was 
known  in  Sparta. 

The  landed  oligarchy  of  our  Southern  plantations 
is  in  more  than  one  respect  analogous  with  that  of 
Sparta.  The  city  of  Sparta  itself  was  rather  an 
agglomeration  of  spacious  country  habitations  than 
resembling  other  great  cities. 

When  the  Dorians  made  Sparta  the  centre  of  their 
power,  the  lands  of  Laconia  were  divided  into  ten 
thousand  equal  lots  for  the  ten  thousand  Spartan  citi- 
zens. Undoubtedly  the  homesteads,  cleared  and  owned 
by  the  first  settlers  and  colonists  in  the  South,  were 
more  equally  divided  than  they  are  now ;  and  the 


GREEKS.  105 

increase  in  the  extent  of  plantations  on  the  one  hand, 
and  the  decrease  of  the  respectability  of  the  poorer 
settlers  and  their  transformation  into  "  poor  oppressed 
white  men,"*  on  the  other,  were  both  effected  by  do_- 
rasatic  IB!  a  very  At  the  time  of  Lycurgus — about  four 
hundred  years  "after  the  division — the  above  number  of 
oligarchs  was  reduced  to  nine  thousand ;  at  the  time 
of  Herodotus — about  four  hundred  years  after  Ly- 
curgus— to  eight  thousand ;  and  thus  a  reduction  of 
one-tenth  took  place  during  each  period  of  from  three 
hundred  to  four  hundred  years.  This  was  the  time 
of  the  world-renowned  Spartan  poverty  and  virtue. 
But  wars,  conquests,  etc.,  changed  the  character  of 
the  Spartans ;  luxury  and  wealth  crept  in,  and  with 
them  came  l«i£ge. estates  and  domestic  slaves,  the  latter 
chiefly  consisting  of  Greek  prisoners  of  war.  At  the 
beginning  of  the  first  Pelopoimesian  war,  Sparta  may 
have  had  two  hundred  and  twenty  thousand  Helots, 
and  there  were  comparatively  few  domestic  slaves 
in  that  number.  The  Pelopoimesian  war  made  the 
Spartans  leaders  of  Greece,  but  filled  Sparta  with 
prisoners  from  other  Greek  states,  and  introduced 
wealth :  from  that  war  begins  the  decline  of  the  Spar- 
tan spirit.  The  Helots  and  the  impoverished  poor 
whites  successively  became  chattels.  Sparta  could  only 
muster  seven  hundred  citizens  against  Epaminondas  at 
Lenctra.  Daring  the  period  between  Herodotus  and 
Aristotle  the  number  of  citizens  was  reduced  to  little 
above  one  thousand.  At  the  Macedonian  conquest, 

*  Edward  A.  Pollard,  letter  to  the  Tribune. 
5* 


106  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

Sparta  averaged  fourteen  chattels  for  every  three  free- 
men. One  hundred  years  after  Aristotle,  under  King 
Agis,  about  two  hundred  oligarchs  constituting  the 
body  politic,  the  citizens  of  Sparta  owned  nearly  all 
the  lands  of  Laconia,  and  worked  them  by  chattels. 

This  numerical  reduction  of  citizens  and  deteriora- 
tion of  their  historic  character  principally  affected  the 
military  standing  of  Sparta.  Causes  so  obvious  as 
not  to  require  explanation  prevent  at  present  a  simi- 
lar diminution  of  the  number  of  Southern  oligarchs, 
notwithstanding  the  existing  numerical  disproportion 
between  them  and  the  non-slaveholding  whites,  whose 
political  freedom,  to  a  rational  appreciation,  is  rather 
nominal  than  real.  The  disease  is  the  same — its 
workings  alone  are  different.  The  sword  was  the  soul 
of  Spartan  institutions  :  the  pure  and  elevated  concep- 
tion of  the  American  social  structure  rests  not  on 
physical  but  on  intellectual  and  moral  force ;  but  its 
deterioration  is  visible  in  the  new  conception  of 
slavery  inaugurated  and  sustained  by  the  militant 
oligarchs.  The  process  of  moral  and  intellectual  de- 
composition in  the  South  would  be  still  more  rapid 
but  for  the  various  influences  from  the  Free  States, 
which,  like  refreshing  breezes,  fan  its  fainting  ener- 
gies. 

The  sword,  it  is  true,  may  have  decimated  whole 
Spartan  communities  ;  but  such  losses  were  supplied 
from  the  class  of  the  Periokes  and  other  freemen,  and 
even  sometimes  from  the  Helots.     Domestic  slavery^ 
devoured  the  small  estates,  degraded  the  freemen,  and- 

' 


GREEKS.  107 

dried  up  the  sources  of  political  renovation.  Five 
thousand  Spartans  fought  at  Platese,  which  gives  a 
total  population  of  about  forty  thousand.  The  num- 
ber of  Helots  owned  by  them  at  that  time  amounted 
to  one  hundred  and  seventy-five  thousand.  Subse- 
quently, after  the  Peloponnesian  and  Macedonian 
wars,  these  Helots  were  transformed  into  chattels, 
and  the  degenerate  Spartans  attempted  to  transform 
the  Periokes  into  Helots,  but  made  them  simply  deadly 
enemies.  Almost  in  proportion  as  the  Spartan  oli- 
garchs increased  in  wealth  and  possessions,  not  only  did 
the  number  of  Helots  and  slaves  increase,  but  military 
ardor  decreased.  At  Leuctra,  Sparta  hired  her  cav- 
alry ;  and  soon  after,  Sparta,  rich  in  Helots  and  chattels 
but  poor  in  citizens,  was  forced  passively  to  witness 
the  curtailing  of  her  frontiers  by  Philip  of  Macedon. 

The  Helots  often  revolted ;  and  frequent  con- 
spiracies were  discovered  and  subdued  in  terrible 
slaughter,  when  the  oligarchs  believed  themselves 
again  safe.  The  old  laws  of  most  of  the  American 
colonies,  north  and  south,  contain  repeated  regula- 
tions, dating  from  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth 
centuries,  concerning  conspiracies,  revolts,  and  tumults 
perpetrated  by  negroes ;  and  this,  too,  several  genera- 
tions before  the  birth  of  active  abolitionism.  For  not 
to  abolitionism  but  to  the  love  of  liberty  inborn  in 
human  nature — in  the  Spartan  Helot  as  in  the  colored 
chattel  of  the  Southern  oligarch — are  to  be  attributed 
the  conspiracies  continually  fermenting  among  South- 
ern slaves.  At  times  the  Spartans  were  obliged  to  ask 


108  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

succor  from  the  Athenians  and  other'  allies  against 
their  revolted  Helots.  To-day  the  Union  is  fully  able 
to  suppress  servile  revolts,  but  in  some  future  time 
the  South  may  vainly  look  in  all  quarters  of  the  hori- 
zon for  active  allies.  It  may  find  some  well-wish  crs 
among  its  interested  northern  sympathizers,  but  the 
chattels  will  have  the  sympathy  of  the  civilized 
Christian  and  heathen  world,  besides  finding  allies 
among  the  free  colored  populations  of  the  Antilles. 
Under  England's  fatherly  and  humane  direction,  these 
colored  populations  are  being  initiated  into  genuine 
Christian  civilization,  and  make  comparatively  great 
strides  and  progress  in  material  and  political  culture, 
in  orderly  life,  in  self-government,  in  the  employment 
of  the  free  press,  and  in  debating  their  interests  in 
legislative  assemblies  and  cabinet  councils.  Ever 
since  the  establishment  of  American  slavery  on  a 
social  and  religious  basis,  the  mass  of  the  white  pop- 
ulation in  the  South,  and,  above  all,  the  great  heroes, 
apostles,  and  combatants  of  the  new  political  creed, 
are  returning  to  barbarism — willingly  and  deliberately 
renouncing  all  genuine  mental  and  moral  culture. 
And  thus  the  two  extremes  may  meet  in  some  future 
emergency — the  colored  inhabitant  of  the  Antilles  as 
a  superior  civilized  being,  will  face  the  barbarized 
white  oppressor  in  the  South. 

The  Spartan  Helot  increased  with  a  fecundity  fear- 
ful for  the  oligarchs,  who  resorted  to  the  horrible 
kryptea,  or  slaughter  of  unarmed  Helots  all  over  La- 
conia  at  a  time  appointed  specially  and  secretly  by 


GREEKS.  109 

the  ephors.  This  was  the  last  resort  to  avert  the 
danger,  and  more  than  once  was  it  used  during  the 
brilliant  epoch  of  Sparta. 

In  the  South  the  chattels  likewise  increase  very 
rapidly,  but  not  rapidly  enough  to  satisfy  the  breeders, 
planters,  and  slave-traders.  All  things  considered,  the 
colored  enslaved  population  increases  in  a  proportion 
by  far  more  rapid  than  the  white.  After  1783  the 
blacks  were  estimated  at  between  five  and  six  hun 
dred  thousand  :  the  census  of  1860  will  find  them  full 
four  millions :  and  no  wonder.  Trafficking  slave-breed- 
ers, as  well  as  planters,  organize  breeding  as  systemati- 
cally as  cattle-raisers  attend  to  their  stock.  In  Vir- 
ginia this  is  the  principal  pursuit,  and  the  chief  source 
of  income  from  domestic  husbandry.  The  breeders 
have  small  enclosures  to  gently  exercise  the  young 
human  stock  like  the  breeders  of  valuable  horses.  In 
some  States,  principally  in  the  cotton  region,  the  col- 
ored chattels  outnumber  the  whites;  in  others  the 
respective  numbers  are  nearly  equal.  About  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty  years  ago,  South  Carolina,  through  the 
voice  of  her  law-makers,  referring  to  the  increase  in 
chattels,  declared  it  an  "  afflicting  providence  of  God 
that  the  white  persons  do  not  proportionably  multi- 
ply." Nowadays  South  Carolina  finds  the  affliction 
a  blessing.  Though  her  colored  population  already 
outnumbers  the  white,  she  is  first  in  assaulting  hu- 
manity by  reopening  the  slave-trade. 

Cotton  is  a  plant  indigenous  to  the  old  world — to 
Asia  and  Africa.     Its  culture  bv  free  labor  may  soon 


110  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

become  very  profitable  in  other  regions  of  the  globe. 
Sooner  or  later  this  will  end  the  exclusive  American 
monopoly  of  its  production,  and  then  the  dead  weight 
of  chattelhood  will  press  fearfully  on  the  oligarchs  in 
economical  as  in  social  ways,  even  if  the  chattels  re- 
main quiet :  this  is,  however,  impossible  to  suppose, 
on  account  of  their  continually  increasing  numbers. 
Already  slaves  are  tortured,  murdered,  burnt  and 
slaughtered  at  the  first  danger,  even  though  it  be 
imaginary.  Now  this  is  done  individually,  and,  even 
according  to  Southern  notions,  illegally.  When  the 
profits  from  slave-labor  shall  dwindle,  and  the  danger 
from  great  masses  of  chattels  shall  increase,  self-pres- 
ervation and  fatality  will  force  the  slaveocracy  into  at- 
tempting to  re-enact  the  Spartan  Itrypteia :  the  cattle- 
breeder  easily  transforming  himself  into  the  butcher. 
Even  now  many  of  them  are  on  the  way  to  bringing 
this  about,  by  exposing  their  old  and  unproductive 
field  hands  to  perish  from  want  and  misery.  • 

In  the  course  of  about  four  centuries,  both  during 
and  after  the  Peloponnesian  war,  the  Spartan  oligar- 
chy was  enriched  more  and  more  by  the  spoils  of 
victorious  wars,  and  by  the  importation  of  slaves  as 
war  prisoners  from  other  Greek  and  from  barbarous 
nations.  Then  the  difference  between  the  rich  and 
poor  was  more  striking,  and  the  eternal  process  of 
oppressing  the  poor,  seizing  upon  their  property,  or 
buying  them  out,  was  busily  and  cheerfully  pursued. 
Then  Laconia  was  held  by  comparatively  few  Spar- 
tan slaveholders — but  tlujre  were  no  more  heroes  of 


GREEKS.  Ill 

Thermopylae.  Citizens  and  freemen  were  a  scarcity 
during  the  Augustan  period;  but  slaves,  the  prop- 
erty of  a  few  wealthy  owners,  actually  covered  La- 
cedemonia  and  Sparta.  Domestic  slavery  undermin- 
ed and  destroyed  the  Spartan  nation  in  precisely 
the  same  mariner  as  it  did  others  before  and  since. 
The  enslaved  Helots  and  Greeks,  and  many  of  the 
descendants  of  the  enslavers,  became,  in  their  turn, 
slaves  of  the  Romans,  then  of  the  Slavic  invaders, 
afterward  of  the  Crusaders,  till  finally  all  of  them, 
masters  and  slaves,  groaned  under  the  yoke  of  the 
Osmanlis.  The  traveller  can  now  scarcely  find  the 
few  mouldering  ruins  of  tig  once  proud  and  en- 
slaving city.  Spartan  history  covers  nearly  a  thou- 
sand years :  and  for  centuries  the  destructive  disease 
was  at  work.  Some  of  its  symptoms,  in  the  course  of 
half  a  century,  are  already  highly  developed  in  the 
South. 

Piracy  and  kidnapping,  which  in  Greece  originated 
at  a  time  when  every  man  saw  an  enemy  almost  in  his 
immediate  neighbor,  did  not  wholly  cease  when  nation- 
al relations  became  more  normal  and  regular.  When 
slavery  began  to  permeate  the  domestic  economy,  pi- 
racy and  the  slave-traffic  were  of  course  more  active. 
The  Southern  enslavers  assert  that  their  region  is  not 
yet  supplied  with  the  necessary  number  of  chattels. 
They  draw  on  piracy,  kidnapping,  and  bloodshed  in 
Africa.  The  almost  incessant  wars  between  the  Greek 
neighboring  tribes  and  nations  encouraged  slavery ; 
and  innocent  citizens,  going  from  one  Greek  state  to 


112  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

another,  were  often  enslaved  through  enmity  and 
greed.  However,  this  savage  custom  became  soft- 
ened and  finally  abandoned  when  the  mutual  relations 
became  more  civilized  and  regulated:  whereas  free- 

O  7 

men  from  free  states  of  the  Union  are  arrested  and 
imprisoned  in  the  so-called  civilized  slave-holding 
states,  and  in  some  cases  they  can  be  legally  sold 
as  slaves. 

In  Bceotia  slaves  were  not  numerous — being  only 
occasionally  made  and  used.  Neither  serfs,  bond- 
men, nor  chattels,  were  held  in  Elis,  Locris,  or  by  the 
Arcadians,  Phocians,  or  Achgeans,  until  the  downfall 
of  Greek  dignity,  liberty,  and  independence,  under 
the  Macedonian  and  Roman  rule.  The  Phocians  pro- 
hibited slavery  by  express  legislation. 

The  lonians  in  Attica  boasted  that  they  sprang 
from  their  native  soil.  They  were  therefore  the  prim- 
itive tillers  and  cultivators  of  their  not  over-fertile  and 
rather  rocky  land,  of  about  one  hundred  and  ninety 
square  miles.  This  land  was  divided  more  or  less 
equally  into  small  homesteads  worked  by  yeomen,  to 
whom  chattels  would  have  been  a  burden.  Centuries 
after  the  heroic  or  legendary  epoch,  when  Attica  pos- 
sessed wealthier  landowners,  Hesiod  advises  the  agri- 
culturists to  work  their  lands  by  the  free  labor  of  the 
Thetes  in  preference  to  slave  labor. 

Athens  became  very  early  a  commercial  city,  and 
perhaps  piratical  expeditions  for  the  kidnapping  of 
slaves  were  fitted  out  from  the  Piraeus.  At  any  rate, 
slavery,  chattelhood,  was  especially,  if  not  exclusive- 


GREEKS.  113 

ly,  fostered  when  commerce  became  more  extensive. 
Athens  was  the  seat  and  focus  of  domestic  slavery. 
In  the  course  of  time  almost  all  trades  were  carried 
on  by  slaves,  as  also  mining,  and  finally,  farming. 
But  all  this  was  the  growth  of  the  long  process  of 
centuries. 

Debtors  were  enslaved ;  but  Solon  abolished  this 
right  of  the  creditor.  He  likewise  abolished  the  cus- 
tom of  going  about  armed  in  the  community.  Gen- 
erally it  is  a  sign  of  a  dangerous  and  very  degraded 
state  of  society  when  men  carry  arms  as  a  necessity. 
By  a  strange  coincidence,  since  slavery  has  been  pro- 
claimed a  moral  and  religious  duty,  the  use  of  bowie- 
knives,  revolvers,  and  rifles  becomes  more  and  more 
the  order  of  the  day  in  the  South.  Not  against  the 
slave,  not  against  any  foreign  enemy,  not  even  against 
the  abolitionist,  do  the  men  of  the  S^th  arm  them- 
selves, but  it  is  against  each  other  that  they  have  re- 
course to  armed  assaults  in  their  private  and  public 
intercourse.  From  the  South  the  savage  custom  in- 
vades the  North,  and  it  has  in  some  cases  been  forced 
on  peaceful  Northern  members  of  Congress  in  self- 
defence  against  the  assaults  of  their  Southern  col- 
leagues. 

The  Ionic  race  had  no  serfs  or  Helots,  either  in 
Attica  or  elsewhere.  But  in  Attica,  as  in  other  Greek 
communities,  and  indeed  throughout  the  whole  world, 
from  among  the  primitive  yeomen  or  peasants,  emerg- 
ed those  who,  more  thrifty,  more  successful,  or  more 
brave,  accumulated  wealth  in  various  ways.  Such 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

was  one  mode  in  which  aristocracy  originated.  These 
yeomen  growing  richer,  acquired  more  land,  bought 
out  smaller  farmers,  and  could  hire  more  field  hands. 
Even  before  Solon  the  aim  of  the  rich  was  to  trans- 
form freeholders  into  tenants,  but  Solon  stemmed  this 
current  for  a  long  period  of  time. 

Parents  could  sell  their  children  into  slavery  ;  Solon 
reduced  this  right  to  such  daughters  as  willingly  sub- 
mitted to  seduction.  A  poor  man  could  sell  himself 
into  slavery,  and  children  exposed  by  their  parents 
were  enslaved  by  the  public  authorities. 

War  and  traffic  furnished  the  great  supplies  of 
slaves  or  chattels  fur  the  Athenians.  Such  chattels 
were  from  all  nations  and  races,  and  the  black  slaves 
constituted  an  accidental  and  imperceptible  minority. 
Witness  ^Esop  telling  the  story  of  a  rustic  who  bought 
a  black  slave  and  unsuccessfully  tried  to  bleach  or  to 
whitewash  it.  If  blacks  had  been  common  merchan- 
dise, the  rustic  would  have  been  familiar  with  its 
nature.  Slavery  was  transmitted  from  parents  to  chil- 
dien,  if  the  prisoner  of  war  was  not  ransomed  or  the 
slave  not  manumitted.  But  at  any  time  a  slave  could 
receive  or  buy  his  freedom,  and  a  chattel  once  liber- 
ated could  not,  under  penalty  of  capital  punishment, 
again  be  violently  enslaved.  In  the  South  they  begin 
to  legislate  for  the  re-enslavement  of  the  liberated : 
the  odium  no  longer  falls  on  the  individual  but  on 
the  whole  body  politic.  All  over  the  ancient  world 
the  state  watched  over  and  protected  the  once  en- 
franchised slave :  the  modern  slave-holding  polity  ex- 


GREEKS.  115 

pels  him  or  legislates  for  his  disfranchisement.  In 
Athens,  as  all  over  Greece,  the  offspring  of  freemen 
and  slave-women  were  free. 

At  first  slaves  performed  domestic  service,  and  after-  * 
ward,  when  their  number  increased,  they  were  em-  f-* 
ployed  in  various  trades.  The  state  used  them  in  public 
works,  sometimes  to  row  the  ships.  But  the  greatest 
number  were  employed  to  work  the  mills  and  mines  of 
Attica.  However,  the  state  itself  did  not  work  the 
mines,  but  rented  them  generally  without  the  slave 
labor;  though  private  individuals  rented  them  for 
a  term  of  years,  together  with  the  slaves  who  worked 
them.  Slowly  chattelhood  spread  over  the  rural 
economy  of  Attica. 

About  the  time  of  the  Persian  wars,  rural  property 
was  still  nearly  equally  divided  among  the  citizens. 
Wealth  was  accumulated  and  rep  resented  iri  commerce, 
in  various  industries,  and  in  the  precious  metals.  But 
at  that  time  slaves  nowhere  outnumbered  the  freemen. 
At  the  battle  of  Marathon  the  Athenians  had  ten 
thousand  hoplites  or  heavily  armed  able-bodied  citi- 
zens ;  at  Platea  eight  thousand ;  and  in  both  battles 
nearly  as  many  pdtasts  or  lightly-armed  troops — 
poorer  citizens,  but  not  serfs,  or  retainers,  or  slaves. 
Before  the  invasion  of  Xerxes,  the  free  population  of 
Attica  probably  amounted  to  more  than  one  hundred 
and  twenty  thousand  of  both  sexes  and  all  ages.  The 
fclave  population  is  estimated  at  the  utmost  as  sixty 
thousand. 

Athens,  like  all  the  other  Greek  republics,  colonized 


116  SLAVERY   TN  HISTORY. 

other  countries  with  the  surplus  of  their  free — mostly 
poor — population.  Herodotus  died  in  such  an  expedi- 
tion. The  Dorians  very  likely  colonized  Sicily,  the  loni- 
•  ans  Italy  or'  Magna  Grecia.  Such  colonizations  relieved 
the  over-populated  mother-country,  extended  the  Hel- 
lenic culture,  but  likewise,  in  more  than  one  way,  fos- 
tered and  nursed  slavery.  The  Greek  colonists  in 
Sicily  and  in  Italy,  conquering  or  pushing  into  the 
interior  the  aborigines  of  these  lands,  enslaved,  kid- 
napped and  sold  them.  Then  the  Greek  cities  warred 
with  and  enslaved  each  other.  Such  was  the  case 
between  Sybaris  and  Crotona,  or  in  Sicily  between 
Syracuse,  Girgentum,  etc.  The  rich  men  of  Athens 
bought  more  and  more  slaves,  purchased  the  lands 
of  the  poor,  substituted  in  various  handicrafts  their 
gangs  of  slave  laborers  for  freemen,  and  exported  the 
impoverished  freemen.*  The  increase  of  large  estates 
and  chattels  went  hand  in  hand  with  the  decrease  of 
freemen  and  public  spirit  in  Athens ;  and  the  same 
was  the  case  in  other  large  commercial  cities  of 
Greece. 

After  the  Persian  war  Athens  became  the  wealth- 
iest of  commercial  cities,  and  the  Athenians  a  con- 
quering nation.  Both  circu instances  increased  the 
number  of  slaves.  But  still  the  landed  property  was 
not  yet  absorbed.  Alcibiades  owned  only  about  three 
hundred plethra,  or  about  seventy-five  acres  of  land  in 
Attica.  The  wealthy  slave-owners  and  oligarchs  were 

*  So  the  poor  whites  of  the  South  emigrate  and  settle  in  the  Western 
territories,  and  the  planters  magnify  their  plantations  and  their  chattels. 


GREEKS.  117 

not  in  power,  but  they  owned  mines  in  Attica  and 
landed  estates  in  various  Greek  dependencies  and 
colonies.  Slavery  prevailed  in  the  city,  and  it  became 
more  and  more  common  on  the  farms.  However, 
on  the  eve  of  the  Peloponnesian  war,  democracy 
still  prevailed.  The  oligarchs,  proud  of  their  slaves, 
mines,  plantations  and  estates,  scorned  the  democracy 
of  Athens,  composed  of  artists,  yeomen,  operatives, 
artisans — who  really  formed  the  soul  of  the  great  Per- 
iclean  epoch. 

Oligarchies  are  alike  all  over  the  world ;  in  most  of 
them,  slave-holders,  however  called,  live  upon  the 
labor  of  others ;  all  of  them  scorn  the  laboring 
classes.  The  Southern  militant  planters  and  their 
Xorthern  servile  retainers  scorn  .the  enlightened 
masses  of  working-men,  the  farmers  and  operatives 
of  the  free  states.  But  it  is  those  masses  which  ex- 
clusively give  original  signification  to  America  in 
the  history  of  human  development.  Athens  and  the 
various  monuments  of  the  Periclean  epoch  coruscate 
over  doomed  Hellas :  so  the  villages  of  the  free  states, 
with  their  schools  and  laborious,  intelligent,  self-reliant 
populations,  shed  their  rays  now  over  the  Christian 
world.  And  the  sight  of  such  a  village  is  a  far  differ- 
ent subject  of  contemplation  from  that  of  the  slave- 
crowded  plantation. 

-•  Slavery  increased  rapidly  in  Athens,  as  in  all  the 
great  commercial  centres,  and  in  the  adjacent  isles  of 
Greece.  At  the  beginning  of  the  Peloponnesian  war, 
Attica  had  a  population  of  about  twenty  thousand 


118  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

male  adults,  or  a  little  over  one  hundred  thousand  free 
persons  of  all  ages  and  sexes.  The  whole  free  popu- 
lation of  Greece  is  estimated  to  have  been  at  that 
time  about  eight  hundred  thousand  souls  ;  and  the 
slaves — the  Spartan  serfs  or  Helots  included — perhaps 
outnumbered  the  freemen.  Thucydides  says  that  the 
island  of  Chios  had  about  two  hundred  and  ten  thou- 
sand slaves,  the  largest  number  next  to  Sparta ;  then 
came  Athens,  with  nearly  two  hundred  thousand  hu- 
man chattels ;  while  other  great  commercial  cities  of 
\  Greece,  as  Sycyon  and  Corinth,  likewise  contained 
very  large  numbers. 

The  Peloponnesian  war  was  waged  with  all  the 
\l  violence  of  a  family  feud.  It  spread  desolation,  im- 
poverishment, carnage  and  slavery  over  Greece.  Cap- 
tives made  by  the  one  or  the  other  contending  party, 
were  sold  by  tens  of  thousands  into  slavery ;  these 
captives  were  principally  the  small  freeholders,  the 
thetes  and  geomori — operatives,  artisans,  and,  indeed, 
free  workmen  of  every  kind.  Their  number  conse- 
quently diminished,  and  their  small  estates  were  either 
bought  or  taken  violently  by  the  rich,  who  thus 
simultaneously  increased  the  number  of  their  chattels 
and  their  acres  of  land.  Thus  did  slavery  permeate 
more  and  more  the  Greek  social  polity,  until,  at  the 
epoch  between  Pericles  and  the  beginning  of  the  Ma- 
cedonian wars,  the  number  of  .slaves  in  Athens  and 
Attica  was  nearly  doubled :  but  the  free  population 
did  not  thus  increase.  Large  landed  estates  became 
more  and  more  common,  till,  in  the  time  of  Demos- 


GREEKS.  119 

thenes,  the  soil  of  Attica  was  concentrated  in  compar- 
atively few  hands.  At  Cheronea,  the  Athenians  fought 
against  Philip  with  mercenary  troops,  and  even  armed 
their  slaves.  But  the  spirit  of  Marathon  and  of  Pla- 
tan was  gone,  and  Athens  succumbed.  The  gold  of 
Philip  was  acceptable  -to  the  rich  slave-holders,  and 
went  principally  into  the  hands  of  the  oligarchs ;  but 
alas !  no  second  Miltiades  ever  emerged  from  their  ranks. 

It  is  supposed  that  at  the  epoch  of  the  Macedonian 
conquest,  the  proportion  of  slaves  and  freemen  was  as 
seven  to  three.  Near  the  beginning  of  the  reign  of 
Alexander,  the  free  population  of  Greece  amounted 
to  one  million,  and  the  slaves  to  one  million  four  hun- 
dred and  thirty-five  thousand.  The  census  taken  in 
Attica  about  that  time,  under  the  archon  Demetrius 
of  Phaleris,  gives  for  Athens  and  Attica  twenty-one 
thousand  adult  male  citizens,  or  a  little  over  one  hun- 
dred thousand  persons  of  all  ages  and  sexes,  and  four 
hundred  thousand  slaves.  The  slave  population  pre- 
ponderated, however,  only  in  the  wealthy  part  of 
Greece;  the  poorer  agricultural  communities,  as  al- 
ready mentioned,  having  been  free  from  its  curse. 
Thus  Corinth  had  four  hundred  and  fifty  thousand, 
and  JEgina  four  hundred  and  seventy  thousand  slaves ; 
and  this  is  the  reason  that  Philip,  Alexander,  Antipa- 
ter,  and  other  conquerors  had  such  comparatively  easy 
work  in  destroying  Greek  liberty. 

The  Macedonian  wars  also  spread  desolation,  sla- 
very and  ruin ;  and  of  Thebans  alone,  Alexander  sold 
over  thirty  thousand  into  slavery. 


120  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

Thus  ended  the  independent  political  existence  of 
Greece  and  Athens.  Rich  slave-holders,  indeed,  they 
still  had ;  but  they  ceased  to  have  a  history  of  their 
own,  or  a  distinct  political  existence ;  and  Greece  be- 
came a  satellite  successively  of  Macedonia,  Syria, 
Egypt  and  Rome. 

To  conclude:  in  Athens,  as  indeed  throughout 
Greece,  the  commercial  cities  inaugurated  domestic 
slavery.  Slavery  first  penetrated  into  domestic  life ; 
then  entered  into  the  various  trades  and  industries, 
and  finally,  almost  wholly  absorbed  the  lands  and 
the  agricultural  economy.  It  also  penetrated  into  the 
functions  of  state,  and  various  minor  offices  were  held 
by  slaves — which  anomaly  was  afterward  reproduced 
in  Rome,  especially  under  the  emperors. 

In  the  slave  section  of  our  own  country  the  system 
has  already  got  possession  of  domestic  and  family  life, 
of  agriculture,  and  of  some  of  the  handicrafts;  and 
slaves  are  employed  on  some  of  the  railroads  as  brake- 
men  and  assistant-engineers.  This  may  be  a  cheering 
proof  of  the  intellectual  capacity  of  the  colored  race, 
but  it  proves  also  the  analogy  which  exists  everywhere 
between  the  workings  of  slavery,  whatever  may  be 
the  distance  of  ages  or  the  color  of  the  enslaved. 

It  was  only  during  the  period  of  the  moral,  social 
and  political  decomposition  of  Greece  that  slavery 
flourished.  A  certain  Diophantus  at  one  period  pro- 
posed a  law  to  enslave  all  the  laborers,  artisans  and 
operatives  in  Athens — so  that  those  who  now  so  loudly 
demand  the  same  thing  here,  had  prototypes  more 


GREEKS.  121 

than  twenty-four  centuries  ago ;  for,  though  history 
has  transmitted  to  infamous  memory  only  the  name 
of  Diophantus,  yet  undoubtedly  he  stood  not  alone. 

In  Athens  and  in  Greece  we  see  the  cancer  growing 
steadily  over  the  whole  social  and  political  organism, 
ID  til  all  Attica  and  almost  the  whole  of  the  ancient 
tfurld  were  divided  only  between  slave-holders  and 
Chattels. 

In  the  slave  marts  of  Athens  and  of  Corinth,  and 
afterward  in  that  of  Delos,  the  sale  of  chattels  was 
conducted  in  precisely  the  same  way  as  it  now  is  in 
Richmond,  in  New  Orleans  and  in  Memphis.  The 
proceedings  of  the  auctioneers  and  the  traders,  of  the 
buyers  and  the  sellers,  were  as  cruel  then  as  they  are 
now.  The  same  eulogies  of  the  capacities  of  able- 
bodied  men,  the  same  piquant  descriptions  of  the  va- 
rious attractions  of  the  women,  the  same  tricks  to 
conceal  bodily  defects,  and  similar  guaranties  between 
vender  and  buyer,  then  as  now. 

When,  finally,  laborers  of  almost  every  kind,  handi- 
craftsmen and  agriculturists,  had  thus  become  enslaved, 
all  the  freemen,  both  rich  and  poor,  were  speedily 
swallowed  up  in  an  equal  degradation.  The  family 
became  disorganized;  the  republics  perished.  This 
was  completely  accomplished  when  Greece  passed 
from  Macedonian  to  Roman  rule :  then  domestic  sla- 
very flourished  as  never  before.  In  that  final  struggle 
the  password  of  the  Greek  slave-holders  was,  "  Unless 
we  are  quickly  lost,  we  cannot  ~be  saved."  The  non- 
slaveholding  mountaineers  of  Achaia  fought  against 


122  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

the  Bomans  until  they  were  almost  exterminated. 
But  Rome  conquered,  and  large  numbers  of  Greeks 
were  sold  into  slavery  by  the  Roman  consuls.  Faul- 
us  Emilius  alone  sold  one  hundred  and  fifty  thou- 
sand Macedonians  and  other  Greeks,  while  the  whole 
population  of  Corinth  was  sold  by  Mummius ;  and 
Sylla  depopulated  Athens,  the  Piraeus  and  Thebes. 
The  Roman  rule  in  Greece  and  over  the  Greek  world 
was  a  fierce  stimulant  to  the  growth  of  domestic  sla- 
very. The  Roman  senate  and  the  Roman  proconsuls 
especially  favored  the  large  slaveholders,  since  they 
were  the  fittest  persons  to  tolerate  the  yoke.  The  Ro- 
mans helped  them  to  degrade  and  to  enslave  as  much 
as  possible.  Rome  wanted  not  freemen  in  Greece, 
but  slaves  and  obedient  slave-drivers;  and  Roman 
tax-gatherers  and  the  farmers  of  public  revenues  sold 
freemen  into  slavery  for  debt.  Finally,  the  celebrated 
Cilician  pirates  desolated  Greece,  carrying  away  and 
selling,  in  Delos,  almost  the  last  remnants  of  the  free 
laboring  population. 

A  small  body  of  free  citizens  now  ruled  immense 
masses  of  slaves.  The  normal  economy  of  nature 
was  thus  destroyed,  and  the  depopulation  of  Greece 
went  on  rapidly.  At  the  time  of  Cicero,  almost  the 
whole  of  Attica  formed  the  estate  of  a  single  slave- 
holder, who  also  owned  other  estates  in  other  parts  of 
Greece.  Many  militant  slave  oligarchs  doubtless  envy 
that  Athenian  slaveholder ;  at  any  rate  they  are  doing 
their  utmost  to  bring  the  Southern  States  to  a  condition 
similar  to  that  just  depicted  in  Athens  and  Greece. 


GREEKS.  123 

During  the  Peloponnesian  wars,  insurrections  of 
slaves  often  took  place  in  Attica,  especially  in  the 
mines.  But  the  greatest  slave  rebellion,  as  far  as  his- 
tory has  recorded,  was  under  the  Roman  administra- 
tion. The  revolted  slaves  then  seized  upon  the  fortress 
of  Sunium,  and  for  a  long  time  fought  bravely  for 
their  freedom. 

The  Greeks,  as  in  some  degree  all  the  peoples  of 
antiquity,  considered  Domestic  slavery  a  social  misfor- 
tune to  the  enslavers,  and  an  accursed  fatality  inhe- 
rent in  human  society.  They  never  presented  it  un- 
der the  false  colors  of  a  normal  and  integral  social 
element.  The  striking  analogies  between  the  work 
ings  of  slavery  in  the  ancient  world  and  in  the  Amer- 
ican republic,  show  that  the  disease  is  everywhere 
and  eternally  the  same,  and  that  it  does  not  ennoble 
either  the  community  or  the  individual  slaveholder, 
as  the  pro-slavery  combatants  apodictically  assert. 

If  in  the  despotic  oriental  empires,  domestic  and 
political  slavery  at  times  played  into  each  other's 
hands  until  they  jointly  destroyed  national  life,  it  was 
domestic  slavery,  single-handed,  which  did  the  work 
in  Greece,  and  particularly  in  Sparta  and  Athens. 
Domestic  slavery  enervated  the  nation  and  made  it 
an  easy  prey  to  foreign  conquest.^  It  converted  into 
a  putrescent  mass  the  once  great  and  brilliant  Grecian 
world. 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  125 

XII. 
EOMANS— THE  EEPUBLICANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Corpus  Juris,  Livy,  Dionysius  of  Halicarnassus,  Niebuhr,  Arnold,  Sa- 
vigny,  Puchta,  Mommsen,  Jhring,  Clinton,  Carl  Hegel,  Zumpt,  ete. 

THE  primitive  occupants  of  the  Mediterranean  pe- 
ninsula— anciently,  and  at  the  present  time,  called 
Italy — issued  from  the  same  Aryan*stock  as  peopled 
Greece.  These  immigrants,  almost  from  the  first  mo- 
ment of  their  arrival,  seem  to  have  devoted  themselves 
to  agriculture,  as  all  the  relics  still  dimly  visible  in 
prehistoric  twilight  certify  to  this  fact.  Thus,  the 
domestic  legend  of  the  Sairlnites  makes  an  ox  the 
leader  of  the  primitive  colonies,  which  is  only  a  differ- 
ent version  of  another  tradition,  according  to  which 
Yitulus  or  Italus— a  legendary  king,  from  whom  the 
name  of  "Italy"  is  derived — brought  about  among 
his  subjects  the  transition  from  shepherds  to  farmers. 
The  name  Italia,  in  ancient  Latin,  signified  a  country 
full  of  cattle.  The  oldest  of  the  Latin  tribes  has  the 
name  of  Siculi,  Sicani,  reapers,  and  another,  Opsci, 
or  field-laborers.  Among  the  Italians  (or  Italos, 
Italiots})  the  legends,  creeds,  laws,  and  manners  all 
originate  in  agriculture ;  while  every  one  knows  the 
use  of  the  plough  in  the  distant  background  of  the 
legendary  foundation  of  Rome.  The  oldest  Koman 
matrimonial  rite,  the  confarreatio,  also  has  its  name 


126  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

from  rye.  With  agriculture  is  primarily  connected  a 
fixed  abode,  and  thus  springs  up  the  love  of  home 
and  family.  From  agricultural  life  arises  the  tribe 
or  clan,  which  is  simply  a  community  of  individuals 
descending  from  the  same  ancestor.  In  this  primitive 
condition  the  field-labors  and  domestic  occupations 
were  performed  by  various  members,  first  of  the 
family,  and  then  of  the  clan.  The  servus  or  servant 
of  that  epoch  was  no  more  a  chattel  in  the  Latin  agri- 
cultural family  and  community  than  was  the  primitive- 
servant  in  the  t£ht  of  the  patriarchs  (see  "  Hebrews" 
and  "Aryas"),  or  than  were  the  servants  of  the  first 
colonists  in  New  England,  Yirginia,  or  the  Carolinas. 
In  these  primitive  households  there  were  no  duties 
for  a  chattel,  for  from  the  earliest  time  agricultural 
and  household  occupations  were  as  sacred  to  the  yeo- 
men and  peasants  of  Latiurn  and  Rome  as  were  the 
domestic  hearth,  the  father,  and  the  family. 

From  the  left  bank  of  the  Tiber  to  the  Yolscian 
mountains,  and  over  the  plains  of  the  Campagna,  lived 
the  Latins — the  prisci  Latini.  They  were  divided 
into  numerous  distinct  families  or  clans,  which  after- 
ward were  the  generators  of  the  Roman  people.  The 
region  where  they  first  appear,  in  the  most  ancient 
times,  was  therefore  settled  by  separate  families,  and 
divided  into  separate  townships  and  villages.  These 
clans  it  was  which  afterward  in  "  the  city"  constituted 
the  primitive  tribus  rusticce  or  rural  tribes. 

The  Ramnes,  Itamneis,  Romaneis,  JKomani  or 
Romans,  the  founders  of  Rome,  were,  in  all  probabil- 


ROMANS:   REPUBLICANS.  127 

ity,  bold  rovers  and  adventurers  from  the  various 
tribes  and  villages  of  Latium.  They  lived  among  the 
bushes  and  groves  of  the  Palatine  Mount,  and  what 
they  acquired  by  depredation  was  common  property. 
These  primitive  legendary  Romans  had  no  use  for 
slaves  ;  they  had  no  mart  in  which  to  sell  them,  and 
it  is  probable  that  they  neither  kidnapped  nor  en- 
slaved any  of  the  neighboring  villagers.  Neither 
legend  nor  history  fixes  positively  how  long  these 
Ramnenses  or  Romans  persevered  in  their  wild  mode 
of  life.  The  legend  very  soon  unites  them  with  other 
settled  families,  such  as  the  Sabine  farmers  and  peas- 
antry. Then  began  the  specific  organized  existence 
of  the  Romans. 

The  whole  soil  of  the  Roman  community  constituted 
an  ager  Romanus  or  publicus.  Every  citizen,  as  a 
part  of  t\\Q  populus  or  state,  received  therefrom  a  share 
of  the  public  land  for  his  private  use.  When  the 
Romans  extended  their  dominions  by  subduing  the 
neighboring  villages  and  districts,  the  lands  of  such 
districts,  their  pasturages,  etc.,  were  incorporated  into 
the  agerJKomanus,  and  the  inhabitants  were  sometimes 
obliged  to  settle  in  Rome  or  in  lands  in  its  vicinity. 
From  these  originated  the  plebeians,  who,  under  cer- 
tain conditions,  received  shares  or  lots  in  the  ager pub- 
licus  or  Romanus.  The  aim  of  these  primitive  wars 
was  neither  to  kidnap  nor  enslave  the  subdued  tribes, 
nor  even  to  transform  them  into  serfs  or  Helots,  at  the 
utmost  to  make  them  tributaries. 

To  the  legendary  Romulus  were   attributed  the 


128  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

regulations  or  laws  which  forbade  the  massacre  or  en- 
slavement of  the  male  youth  of  conquered  villages  or 
districts,  and  prohibited  also  the  transformation  of  the 
conquered  lands  into  pasturages,  and  provided  that  they 
should  be  parcelled  into  small  homesteads  for  Roman 
citizens,  ^.t  first  tw'o  acres,  and  afterward  seven,  con- 
stituted such  a  civic  patrimony  or  homestead.  It  was 
the  abandonment  of  this  law  in  after  ages  which  gen- 
erated slavery  and  the  ruin  of  the  populace. 

Only  the  prisoners  made  on  the  battle-field  and 
counted  among  the  spoils,  were  sold  by  the  state  at 
public  auction :  sub  hasta,  "  under  the  spear,"  and 
sub  corona,  "  the  citizen  wearing  a  crown" — to  the 
citizens  or  members  of  the  community.  Such  pris- 
oner, like  all  other  vended  booty,  became  a  mancipium, 
res  mancipia,  (from  tnanu  capere,  "  taken,  caught  by 
the  hand.")  Such  slaves,  in  all  probability,  were  not 
numerous.  A  more  prolific  source  of  slavery  was  the 
right  to  enslave  a  debtor  for  life.  The  debtor  be- 
came a  mancipium ;  and  even  when  the  right  to  en- 
slave him  was  abolished,  the  legal  formality  of  catching 
him  or  touching  by  the  hand,  was  maintained. 

The  power  of  the  father  or  chief  *of  the  household 
— -patriot,  potestas — was  limitless,  in  the  precincts  of 
the  house,  over  both  the  family  and  the  servants. 
The  father,  be  he  patrician  or  plebeian,  could  sell  hia 
eon  into  slavery,  but  the  right  was  very  seldom  used. 
So  also,  the  father  had  the  right  of  life  and  death 
over  all  his  family  and  household.  Manumission  of 
slaves  was  common  ;  it  existed  from  the  most  ancient 


ROMAN'S:    REPUBLICANS.  129 

times.  The  slave  could  also  buy  his  liberty.  Subse- 
quently, in  the  last  centuries  of  the  republic  and  un- 
der the  emperors,  a  slave  could  be  emancipated  by 
various  positive  enactments,  and.  the  status  of  the 
manumitted  slave  often  passed  through  various  gra- 
dations before  reaching  absolute  independence.  The 
fortieth  book  of  the  Pandects  contains  several  chap- 
ters relating  to  manumission. 

Sometimes,  though  rarely,  under  the  kings,  the  pub- 
lic slaves — or  those  of  the  state,  exclusively  war  pris- 
oners— were  employed  on  public  works,  or  to  take 
care  of  public  buildings,  or  to  attend  on  magistrates 
or  priests.  The  condition  of  public  slaves  was  prefer- 
able to  that  of  the  private  slaves  ;  indeed,  the  former 
subsequently  had  the  right  to  dispose  by  will  of  half 
of  their  property. 

The  land  was  tilled  by  the  hands  of  the  senators 
themselves,  patricians  though  they  were.  If  a  patri- 
cian (pater)  possessed  more  land  than  he  could  culti- 
vate himself,  he  divided  it  among  small  free  cultiva- 
tors, or  let  it  out ;  and  no  servile  hand  desecrated  the 
plough.  The  slaves  employed  in  the  house  were  not 
numerous. 

King  Servius  Tullius  inaugurated  a  political  reform, 
intended  to  alleviate  the  condition  of  the  plebeians 
oppressed  by  the  patricians ;  and  in  preparation  for  it 
he  took  a  census.  At  that  time  Rome  had  eighty-four 
thousand  able-bodied  citizens  between  the  ages  of 
eighteen  and  sixty  years,  or  a  total  population  of 
about  four  hundred  thousand  free  persons  of  all  ages 


130  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

and  sexes.  To  this  number  must  be  added  the  ple- 
beians, who  were  not  yet  citizens.  The  artisans,  op- 
eratives, clients  and  strangers  perhaps  doubled  this 
estimate  of  the  population  of  Home,  the  limits  of 
which  then  stretched  from  the  Tiber  to  the  Anio,  in- 
cluding, probably,  the  lands  of  Alba,  and  making  in 
all,  an  area  of  about  one  hundred  and  twenty  or  one 
hundred  and  forty  square  miles.  There  would  thus 
be  more  than  five  thousand  five  hundred  inhabitants 
to  a  square  mile;  so  that  there  could  have  remained 
but  very  little  room  for  slaves. 

In  the  first  stages  of  the  republic,  the  patricians  con- 
tinually increased  their  landed  estates,  and  by  renting 
these  to  tenants,  they  acquired  power  over  the  poor 
free  laborers,  and  by  lending  them  money,  got  a  claim 
on  their  bodies  and  also  on  the  free  yeomen  and  rus- 
tics. The  patricians  were  hard  creditors,  and  rigor- 
ously availed  themselves  of  their  legal  rights,  and 
their  ergastula — caves  or  vaulted  prisons — were  al- 
most continually  filled  with  poor  debtors.  This  im- 
poverishment of  the  free  yeomanry  increased  after 
the  terrible  devastations  perpetrated  by  the  Gauls 
under  Brennus.  Finally,  these  financial  oppressions 
generated  those  revolts  of  the  plebeians  which  termi- 
nated in  their  obtaining  political  rights  and  full  citi- 
zenship, together  with  the  jurisprudeutial  reform 
known  as  the  Twelve  Tables. 

During  the  first  three  or  four  centuries  of  the 
republic,  the  number  of  slaves  who  were  non- 
debtors  was  very  limited.  At  the  census  made  in  the 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  131 

year  of  Rome  280,  the  free  population  amounted  to 
over  four  hundred  and  ten  thousand  persons,  and  there 
were  then  only  seventeen  thousand  slaves. 
/\Few,  if  any,  women  were  originally  enslaved.  If 
the  nursling  of  a  Roman  family  often  drew  its  milk 
from  the  paps  of  a  slave  woman,  the  Roman  matron, 
in  turn,  often  gave  her  breast  to  the  babe  of  a  slave. 

In  those  early  times  the  slaves  were  kindly  treated ; 
they  were  regarded  rather  as  members  of  the  family 
than  as  chattels;  they  took  their  meals  with  their 
masters,  and  participated  in  the  sacrifices  and  worship 
of  the  gods.  They  were  not  considered  dangerous 
elements  in  the  household  or  the  state.  From  that 
early  epoch  also  date  certain  privileges  conceded  to 
the  slaves — such  as  their  earnings  m  peeulium,  which, 
at  first  established  only  by  common  usage,  became 
afterward  defined  and  specified  by  the  civil  law,  in 
Avhich  originally  the  slave  was  almost  entirely  ignored. 

Plebeians,  proletarians,  clients,  free  artisans — almost 
all  of  whom  were  Romans — formed,  in  the  first  cen- 
turies, the  bulk  of  the  slaves  kept  in  the  ergastula  of. 
the  patricians.  Frequently,  when  a  consul  wanted 
soldiers,  he  would  order  the  creditors  to  open  their 
vaults  and  disgorge  the  victims  for  his  service  in  a 
campaign.  And  sometimes,  though  rarely,  a  consular 
edict  quashed  the  debts  and  set  them  free. 

In  these  earliest  times  of  the  Republic  the  name  of  a 
proletarius,  or  procreator  of  children,  was  held  in  honor. 
It  was  to  an  increase  of  the  number  of  its  freemen,  not 
of  its  slaves,  that  the  Republic  hoped  for  duration  and 


132  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

power.  To  be  called  eolonus,  or  a  cultivator,  was 
also  an  honor  to  a  Roman  citizen,  whether  patrician 
or  plebeian,  in  the  times  of  Cincinnatus,  Dentatus, 
and  Regulus.  Labor  was  then  a  high  distinction, 
nay  it  was  sacred ;  and  a  slave  may  ahn'ost  be  con- 
sidered an  accident  in  domestic  pursuits.  Scaurus, 
then  one  of  the  wealthiest  and  most  powerful  sen- 
ators, had  six  slaves,  Curius  Dentatus  one,  Kegulus 
one,  when  he  commanded  the  Roman  legions  against 
Carthage,  while  Cincinnatus  may  have  had  one,  but 
most  probably  none. 

The  three  hundred  patrician  Fabii,  who  left  Rome, 
crossed  the  Tiber  and  settled  at  the  utmost  limits  of 
the  state,  to  guard  and  defend  it  from  the  inroads  of  in- 
vaders— were  yeomen,  ploughmen,  and  farmers.  And 
without  intending  to  offend  or  disparage  the  ennobled 
pro-slavery  militants  of  this  age  and  country,  one  may 
surely  suppose  that  they  have  at  least  a  little  respect 
for  the  names  and  the  character  of  a  Dentatus,  a  Cin- 
cinnatus, and  a  Regulus. 

However,  the  patricians  and  many  of  the  rich  ple- 
beians continued  uninterruptedly  to  increase  their 
lands  in  the  ager  publicus  at  the  cost  of  the  smaller 
yeomen,  and  that  at  a  time  when  rural  slavery  may 
be  said  to  have  been  in  its  infancy.  And  it  was  the 
object  of  the  celebrated  agrarian  laws  to  restore  the 
balance  between  the  rich  and  the  poor  in  the  posses- 
sion of  the  public  lands. 

The  wars  carrried  on  by  Rome  with  the  Greek  cities 
in  Italy,  which  were  crowded  with  slaves,  and  the 


ROMANS:   REPUBLICANS.  133 

wars  carried  on  beyond  the  borders  of  Italy,  were  the 
great  nurseries  of  slavery.  In  such  wars  free  citizens 
were  of  course  killed  in  vast  numbers,  and  slave  war- 
prisoners  were  brought  back  to  Rome  in  their  stead. 
The  Punic  wars  are  the  turning  point  in  the  political 
history  and  in  the  social  and  moral  development  of 
the  Romans.  These  wars  gave  the  first  great  stimulus 
both  to  urbane  and  rustic  slavery.  Urbane  slaves  were 
those  employed  in  houses  and  villas  for  personal  ser- 
vice ;  rustic  slaves  were  those  engaged  in  working  the 
estates. 

Rome  became  more  and  more  a  maritime  and  com- 
mercial emporium,  and  slaves  were  now  imported  as 
merchandise,  besides  the  continually  increasing  num- 
ber of  prisoners  of  war.  Thus  Regulus  brought  over 
twenty  thousand  Carthaginians  of  all  conditions  of 
life,  who  were  sold  into  slavery.  But  even  at  the 
time  of  the  second  Punic  war,  the  number  of  slaves 
of  all  kinds  must  have  been  comparatively  very  small ; 
for  after  the  terrible  defeat  at  Cannes,  the  Roman 
senate  ordered  the  slaves  to  be  armed,  and  only  eight 
thousand  were  inscribed  on  the  military  roll.  The 
census  taken  about  that  time  gave,  in  all  the  state, 
two  hundred  and  thirty-seven  thousand  Roman  adult 
citizens,  or  1,185,000  free  persons  of  all  sexes  and 
ages  ;  making  in  all,  770,000  Romans,  with  their  Ital- 
ian allies,  fit  for  military  duty.  . 

The  victorious  Hannibal  sold  into  slavery  thousands 
of  Roman  citizens ;  while  the  final  conquest  of  the 
Carthaginian  empire  and  of  Sicily  poured  many  thou- 


134:  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

sands  of  slaves  into  Rome  from  Africa,  from  Sicily, 
and  from  Spain.  Tims  thirty  thousand  inhabitants 
of  Palermo  and  twenty-five  thousand  of  Agrigentum, 
were  sold  into  slavery.  Among  those  brought  by 
Scipio  from  Africa,  were  two  thousand  artisans  whom 
he  promised  he  would  not  sell,  but  would  keep  as 
slaves  of  the  state. 

Henceforth  conquests  in  and  out  of  -Italy  became 
a  social  and  political  necessity  for  Home.  The  spoils 
and  lands  rapidly  increased  the  wealth  of  the  citizens, 
but  principally  of  the  patricians.  The  habits  of  lux- 
ury, the  contempt  of  manual  and  especially  agricul- 
tural labor,  became  general ;  and  with  it  the  demand 
increased  for  slaves  to  work  the  estates  and  to  cater 
to  the  other  wants  of  the  rich  and  effeminate  Romans. 
So  now  again,  war  and  rapine,  the  annexation  of 
Mexico,  Central  America,  Cuba  and  Hayti,  are  the 
aims  of  the  militant  American  slaveocracy. 

In  course  of  time  Rome  became  a  mart  for  slaves,  as 
great  as  were  Carthage,  Corinth,  Athens  and  Syracuse. 
The  slave  market,  like  all  the  other  markets  in  the 
city,  was  superintended  by  the  sediles.  The  munici- 
pal regulations  compelled  the  vender  to  hang  a  scroll 
around  the  neck  of  the  slave,  containing  a  description 
of  his  character,  in  which  his  defects  were  declared 
and  his  health  warranted,  especially  his  freedom  from 
epilepsy  and  violent  diseases.  The  nativity  of  the  slave 
\vas  considered  important  and  was  also  to  be  declared. 
"When  the  Romans  conquered  Asia,  the  Syrians  (who 
belonged  to  the  Caucasian  race)  were  considered  to 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  135 

be  especially  adapted  for  slavery,  just  as  the  negroes 
are  at  the  present  day.  An  incalculable  majority  of 
the  Roman  slaves  were  of  the  Caucasian  or  Japhetic 
race.  Where,  oh,  where,  during  these  almost  countless 
centuries,  slept  the  Scriptural  curse  of  Ham  ? 

The  Hannibalian  war  was  eminently  destructive  to 
the  yeomanry  and  to  their  small  homesteads.  In- 
ternal domestic  economy  was  shaken  from  the  foun- 
dation and  almost  entirely  destroyed  ;  the  arable  lands 
were  rapidly  turned  into  wild  sheep  pastures,  with 
wild  slaves  on  them  as  shepherds ;  the  patricians  no 
longer  considered  agriculture  their  first  occupation, 
when  they  found  that  the  slaves  of  Sicily,  Africa,  and 
afterward  Egypt,  were  able  to  nourish  both  them  and 
the  people ;  and  any  land  still  in  culture,  was  worked  by 
poor  farmers,  by  colonists  and  slaves.  The  term  colo- 
nist, also,  now  acquired  a  somewhat  degraded  signifi- 
cation, for  they  were  now  but  poor  proletarians  and 
plebeians.  Now  also  came  into  more  common  use 
the  legal  denomination  familia  rustica,  or  rural  chat- 
tels ;  and  perhaps  at  this  time,  or  soon  after,  originat- 
ed in  Rome  the  proverb  :  "  As  many  slaves,  so  many 
enemies" 

In  the  course  of  the  sixth  century,  u.  c.,  there  burst 
out  in  great  force  the  antagonism  between  the  free  ru- 
ral laborer  and  the  slave.  The  struggle  for  life  and 
death  between  the  large  land  and  slave  holders  and  the 
yeomanry  or  freeholders,  became  more  and  more  ac- 
tive. That  which  had  taken  root  but  slowly  in  the 
previous  centuries,  became  strengthened  by  contact 


136  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

with  nations  of  older  and  more  corrupt  civilizations. 
The  influence  of  Carthage  appeared  in  the  rural  econ- 
omy of  the  Romans,  and  they  began  to  model  their 
agriculture  on  the  Carthaginian  slave  husbandry.  The 
book  on  "  Agriculture,"  written  by  Magon,  a  Cartha- 
ginian, was  translated"  into  Latin  by  order  of  the  sen- 
ate. The  country  was  rapidly  filled  with  slaves,  and 
now  originated  that  reckless  cruelty  in  dealing  with 
them  which  was  reflected  soon  after  in  the  laws.  The 
large  slaveholders  continually  enlarged  their  estates 
by  buying  or  seizing  under  various  pretexts  the  small 
homesteads.  In  the  times  of  Publicola  and  of  the 
Twelve  Tables,  the  small  freeholders  had  been  driven 
to  despair  by  debts  and  executions ;  but  now  they 
were  ruined  and  utterly  destroyed  by  slave  labor. 
The  patricians,  who  had  formerly  been  mortgagees  of 
homesteads,  and  for  whom  the  freeholder  had  worked 
to  quash  his  indebtedness,  now  became  large  planters. 
Thus  in  Rome  and  throughout  Italy,  as  well  as  in  the 
conquered  provinces,  the  slave  tide  rose  higher  and 
higher.  These  provinces  constituted  the  estates  of  the 
sovereign  Roman  people;  but  in  their  administration 
the  patricians  applied  the  same  discipline,  the  same 
iron  rod  that  they  held  over  their  slaves.  They  kept 
the  ironed  chattels  in  walled  courts  and  prisons,  and 
it  became  proverbial  that  "A  good  mastiff  should 
show  no  mercy  to  slaves  " — a  proverb  still  applicable 
to  the  bloodhounds  of  slavery. 

The  poor  freemen,  expelled  from  the  country  and 
deprived  of  employment,  crowded  more  and  more  into 


ROMANS:   REPUBLICANS.  137 

Rome,  increasing,  to  a  fearful  extent,  the  Roman  pro- 
letariate. For  more  than  three  centuries  the  best  men 
of  Rome,  Crassus,  Licinius,  Emilianus,  Drusus,  and 
the  Gracchi,  made  various  efforts  to  arrest,  by  agra 
rian  laws,  the  destruction  of  freeholds,  tirst  by  the 
large  estates,  and  then  by  slaveholders.  These  efforts 
were  the  principal  causes  of  the  internal  struggles  and 
civil  wars  of  the  Roman  republic,  and  their  failure 
proved  the  destruction  of  the  Roman  world.  Scipio 
^Emilianus  Africanus  prophecied  the  downfall  of  lib- 
erty and  of  the  Roman  state,  if  this  substitution  of 
plantation  economy  for  the  old  yeomanry  and  free- 
holds did  not  cease.  About  the  year  620  u.  c.,  scarcely 
any  freeholds  for  yeomen  existed  in  Etruria;  and 
Plutarch  says,  "  When  Tiberius  Gracchus  went  through 
Tuscany  to  Numantia  he  found  the  country  almost  de- 
populated, there  being  scarcely  any  free  husbandmen 
or  free  shepherds,  but  for  the  most  part  imported 
slaves.  He  then  first  conceived  the  course  of  policy," 
etc.  An  account  almost  precisely  similar  of  the  pres- 
ent condition  of  Virginia  may  be  found  in  a  speech 
made  a  few  years  ago  by  one  of  her  own  sons — one, 
too,  of  the  most  ardent  upholders  of  slavery,  whether 
as  governor  of  the  state,  as  active  politician,  or  as  a 
private  citizen.  The  Roman  planter  desolated  Etruria 
by  devoting  it  to  the  breeding  of  cattle  ;  the  Virginian 
desolates  her  prolific  soil  and  his  own  manhood  by 
devoting  them  to  the  breeding  of  "niggers."  But 
here  the  analogy  ceases.  The  Virginian  savior  will 
stand  in  history  the  antipodes  of  the  Gracchi. 


138  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

The  Eoman  oligarchs,  slaveholders  and  slave- 
traders,  baffled  the  sublime  efforts  of  the  Gracchi, 
who  attempted  not  only  to  preserve  but  to  increase 
the  number  of  freeholders.  The  Gracchi  were  mur- 
dered by  the  oligarchs  and  the  degraded  rabble. 
Publius  Scipio  Nasica  and  other  senators,  fomented 
and  incited  Publius  Satureins  and  Lucius  Rufus, 
who,  armed  with  bludgeons  or  legs  of  broken  chairs, 
struck  down  arid  murdered  Tiberius  Gracchus.  With 
similar  barbarity  Senator  Sumner  was  assaulted  in  his 
chair  of  office ;  and  Senators  Toombs  and  Mason,  as 
well  as  HODS.  Keitt  and  Brooks,  had  thus  their  bloody 
prototypes  in  Rome.  The  murder  of  the  Gracchi  was 
applauded  by  the  degraded  Roman  rabble;  so  also 
did  the  "  poor  whites"  in  the  South  applaud  the  as- 
sault on  Sumner,  as  well  as  every  other  act  of  sav- 
age violence  perpetrated  in  Washington  or  elsewhere 
in  the  interests  of  slavery.  The  Roman  men  and  ma- 
trons, however,  did  not  present  cudgels  of  honor  to 
Publius  Satureius  and  Lucius  Rufus. 

The  current  of  slavery  now  flowed  in  unchecked 
course,  ever  enlarging  as  it  advanced.  The  free  citi- 
zens, deprived  of  their  homes  and  property,  though 
now  inspired  no  more  by  the  antique  Roman  virtue, 
nevertheless  preserved  somewhat  of  their  former 
bravery,  and  the  legions  extended  the  Roman  sway 
over  Greece  and  Asia.  The  captives  taken  from  the 
cities  and  districts «were  no  longer  colonized,  as  for- 
merly, but  were  sold  into  slavery  like  prisoners 
made  on  the  battle-field,  and  the  most  vigorous  and 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  139 

patriotic  portion  of  the  population  of  other  countries 
was  sold  as  chattels.  The  depopulation  of  Macedon, 
Epirus,  and  Greece  by  the  Roman  conquerors,  has  been 
already  mentioned.  Cato  brought  large  numbers  of 
slaves  from  Cyprus;  Lucullus  must  have  made  in- 
numerable thousands  in  Bithynia  and  Cappadocia, 
judging  from  the  low  price  of  about  two- thirds  of  a 
dollar  per  head,  for  which  his  human  booty  was  sold. 
Marius  made  slaves  of  more  than  one  hundred  and 
fifty  thousand  Gauls,  Kymri  and  Teutons,  and  among 
them  undoubtedly  many  Angles  and  Saxons. 

The  exactions,  taxes  and  tributes  which  the  Roman 
oligarchy  compelled  the  conquered  kingdoms  to  pay, 
increased  the  general  poverty,  ruin  and  slavery.  The 
men  and  children  of  the  Sicilians  and  other  nations 
were  sold  into  slavery  by  the  Roman  tax-gatherers : 
and  when  Marius  demanded  from  Nicomede  of  Bi- 
thynia, as  an  ally,  his  contingent  of  troops,  the  king 
made  answer  that  all  his  able-bodied  men  were  sold 
into  slavery  by  the  Roman  tax  and  tribute  gatherers. 
And  even  to  the  present  day,  in  the  slave  states,  they 
sell  into  slavery  free  men  and  women  for  the  costs  of 
prison  and  judgment. 

All  these  slaves,  either  in  person  or  cash,  centred 
toward  Rome,  and  thus  increased  the  power  and  re- 
sources of  the  oligarch  slaveholders,  while  at  the 
same  time  they  incontinently  devoured  the  domestic 
economy  of  the  state  ;  and  the  impoverished  and  home- 
less freemen  took  their  revenge  on  the  oligarchs  under 
Marius,  father  and  son,  and  under  Oinna ;  while  Sylla, 


MO  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

in  turn,  was  the  avenging  sword  of  the  oligarchs  and 
slaveholders.  In  his  time  slaveholders  were  composed 
principally  of  wealthy  ancient  patricians  and  new 
rich  men  or  cavaliers,  who  together  constituted  the  oli- 
garchy of  capital :  just  as  now,  the  "  old  families,"  as 
they  are  called,  of  the  slave  states  combine  with  the 
new  plantation-buyers,  overseers,  traders,  etc.,  and 
jointly  form  the  slave-driving  oligarchy. 

Sylla  shed  in  torrents  the  blood  of  those  who  dared 
to  hope  for  a  reform  from  Marius  and  the  reduction 
of  the  power  of  the  slaveholders.  He  was  their  soul 
and  their  representative,  and  was  guilty  of  every  cru- 
elty to  uphold  the  interest,  not  of  Rome,  but  of  the 
egotistical  oligarchy ;  just,  again,  as  in  the  slave  states, 
the  diminutive  would-be  Syllas  are  ready  to  sacrifice 
every  thing  to  maintain  slavery,  even  to  the  destruc- 
tion of  society  and  the  republic ;  while  the  public 
spirit  of  a  free  state  makes  every  freeman  seek  his 
own  welfare  in  the  general  good. 

In  the  time  of  Sylla,  Italy  contained  about  thirteen 
millions  of  slaves  ;  and  slave  insurrections,  both  there 
and  in  Sicily,  succeeded  each  other  almost  uninter- 
ruptedly. History  has  recorded  some  of  them,  and 
immortalized  the  name  of  the  heroic  Spartacus.  The 
insurrection  in  Sicily  also,  under  Ennus,  lasted  more 
than  four  years,  and  cost  the  lives  of  nearly  a  million 
of  victims. 

Slave-breeding  was  not  yet  conducted  on  a  large 
scale.  The  advice  of  .Cfltp the  Grumbler,  was  against 
its  permission ;  and  he  obliged  his  slaves  to  pay  him 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  141 

a  tax  from  their  peculiwn  whenever  they  cohabited 
with  the  other  sex:"*B*-i/  -&U«S  **"* 

The  large  amount  of  grain  imported  from  conquered 
countries  cultivated  by  slaves,  brought  about  a  com- 
petition which  soon  destroyed  the  homesteads  of 
the  yeomanry,  and  transformed  the  fertile  Campagna 
and  almost  the  whole  of  Italy  into  a  vast  cattle  pas- 
turage. 

It  has  been  already  mentioned  (see  "  Greeks")  that 
during  the  post-Alexandrian  dissolution  of  Greece 
and  of  the  east,  Cilician  piracy  was  rampant  in  the 
eastern  part  of  the  Mediterranean.  Until  Pompey 
destroyed  this  piracy,  it  had  its  centres  and  markets 
in  Crete;  in  Rhodes,  and  even  in  Alexandria ;  but  the 
principal  mart  was  in  Delos,  where  sometimes  ten 
thousand  slaves  changed  masters  in  a  single  day. 
The  Roman  merchants  were  the  best  patrons  of  the 
Cilician  pirates ;  and  recent  developments  show  that 
our  slave-planters  are  again  beginning  to  be  willing 
customers  to  the  Americo- African  pirates  and  slave- 
traders.  In  general,  wherever  the  capitalist-slave- 
holder is  permitted  to  develop  his  supremacy  in  a 
state,  both  man  and  society  are  materially  and  moral- 
ly ruined.  Thus  it  was  with  Rome  and  Italy  at  that 
epoch :  and  so  also,  the  American  slave  states  move 
on  rapidly  in  the  orbit  from  which  Rome  whirled  into 
the  abyss. 

In  the  Mithridatic  and  Asiatic  wars,  Pompey  en- 
slaved more  than  two  millions  of  Asiatics ;  and  accor- 
ding to  the  census  made  under  him,  Italy  contained 


/ 

fv 


142  SLAVERY  IN   HISTORY. 

at  that  time  only  450,000  able-bodied  citizens  capable 
of  military  duty,  or  a  total  free  population  of  about 
2,200,000.  |It  is  also  asserted  that  Caesar  enslaved  at 
least  one  million  of  Gauls.  In  the  age  of  Cicero  only 
about  two  thousand  citizens  of  Home  possessed  land- 
ethpfoperty,  but  with  it  they  owned  legions  of  chat- 
tels ;  and  Cicero — a  parvenu  without  manhood,  first 
the  accessory  and  then  the  betrayer  of  Cataline — 
maintained  that  only  slaveholders  could  be  considered 
respectable. 

After  the  patricians  were  restored  to  power  by  Sylla, 
they  found  that  war  and  hereditary  slavery  did  not 
supply  the  necessary  quantity  of  slaves ;  and  they 
consequently  began  to  kidnap  and  enslave  poor  free- 
men— even  their  Roman  fellow-citizens.  To  rob  and 
take  violent  possession  of  the  remaining  freeholds  be- 
came now  a  matter  of  course.  In  the  time  of  Cicero 
nearly  all  handicrafts  in  the  city,  which  had  once  been 
in  the  hands  of  freemen  and  clients,  were  carried  on  by 
slaves,  either  directly  for  their  masters,  or  indirectly 
by  being  hired  out  to  others.  It  became  more  and 
more  common  to  hire  out  skilful  slaves  and  to  train 
them  up  with  the  view  of  receiving  the  revenues  of 
their  proficiency.  It  was  then  just  as  it  is  now  ;  for 
then  Italy,  as  now  the  slave  states,  was  owned  by 
slave-drivers,  worked  by  slaves,  and  guarded  by  heart- 
less overseers  and  bloodhounds. 

In  the  beginning  of  his  career,  Caesar  tried  to  create 
a  free  yeomanry  by  distributing  the  public  domain 
among  the  poor  free  citizens  and  the  disabled  soldiers. 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  143 

After  the  victory  over  the  oligarchs  and  Pompey,  he 
colonized  eighty  thousand  of  the  proletarians  of  Rome. 
But  it  was  forever  too  late  ;  and  besides,  the  oligarchs 
and  slaveholders  opposed  his  attempts.  Scarcely  any 
free  laborers  existed ;  the  domain  of  the  slave-driver 
was  universal ;  indeed  it  was  such  an  epoch  as  is  now 
again  so  ardently  desired  by  small  senators,  would-be 
statesmen,  and  the  whole  vanguard  of  the  knight- 
errant  army  of  chattelhood.  Freeholds  disappeared 
from  Italy,  and  almost  from  the  world,  with  the  ex- 
ception perhaps  of  the  valleys  in  the  Apennines  and 
the  Abruzzi.  The  region  from  the  modern  Civita  Yec- 
chia  across  Tusculum  to  Boise  and  Naples,  where  once 
a  dense  population  of  Latin  and  Italian  free  yeoman- 
ry ploughed  the  soil  and  reaped  the  harvest,  was  now 
covered  with  splendid  villas  for  the  masters  and  with 
ergastula  for  their  chattels.  But  the  proud  inhabi- 
tants of  the  villas,  the  rich  patricians  and  slaveholders, 
were  themselves  soon  to  become  political  slaves.  Cen- 
tral Italy  aud  the  lands  around  Rome  which  nursed 
the  armies,  and  from  which  were  recruited  the  con- 
querors of  the  Carthaginians,  Numidians  and  the  pha- 
lanxes of  Macedonia,  was  now  a  waste,  depopulated 
solitude,  owned  by  a  few  wealthy  planters. 

Domestic  slavery  now  brought  Rome  into  the  con- 
dition to  which  it  had  reduced  Greece  and  the  orien- 
tal world  centuries  before.  The  Italy  of  Yarro  and 
of  Cicero  resembled  the  Greece  of  Poly  bins,  Car- 
thage on  the  eve  of  its  fall,  or  Asia  as  found  by  Alex- 
ander. What  will  ~be  ike  full  and  ripe  crop  of  this 


14:4  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

dragon-teeth-seed  in  America?  Whenever  domestic 
slavery  is  planted  and  takes  enduring  root  in  a  country, 
even  the  beauty  of  nature  is  ravaged  and  destroyed. 
Do  the  chattel-cabins  enliven  the  landscape  of  Yirgiriia 
or  beautify  the  coast  of  Carolina  ?  The  living  rill  or 
river  gloriously  reflects  a  thousandfold  the  rays  and 
colors  of  light,  but  stagnant  sewers  are  everywhere 
alike  fetid  and  abominable. 

During  the  epoch  when  slavery  flourished  and  the 
Roman  republic  fell  into  decay,  those  terrible  cruel- 
ties toward  slaves  which  history  records,  and  which 
even  now  strike  the  mind  with  horror,  came  into 
vogue.  Slaves,  chained  in  gangs,  worked  in  the  fields ; 
at  night  they  were  crowded  together  in  prisons ;  a 
Greek  letter  was  branded  with  a  hot  iron  into  their 
cheeks,  and  other  unmentionable  cruelties  were  prac- 
tised. Still,  even  then,  they  were  comparatively  well 
fed,  as  indeed  aje  all  useful  and  submissive  beasts. 
The  Roman  fabulist  Phoedrus,  in  his  tale  of  "  The 
Dog  and  the  Wolf"  tells  how  this  good  feeding  was 
regarded  by  the  nobler  minds  of  that  demoralized 
epoch. 

After  the  time  of  Cato  the  breeding  of  slaves  be- 
came more  general,  and  one  woman  would  frequently 
nurse  several  babies,  while  their  mothers  were  other- 
wise employed.  This  became  even  more  common, 
however,  in  a  subsequent  epoch. 

Slaves  were  used  for  all  purposes  in  the  household 
of  the  rich  Roman  oligarch.  They  performed  tho 
highest  as  well  as  the  basest  labors ;  they  were  even 


ROMANS:  REPUBLICANS.  145 

doctors,  architects,  literati,  readers  and  amanuenses ; 
they  exercised  in  some  degree  the  function  of  printing 
in  our  day,  as  by  their  labor  manuscripts  were  copied 
and  libraries  formed. 

How  domestic  slavery  degraded  the  Roman  slave- 
holder is  evidenced  by  the  direct  statements  of  histo- 
ry, as  well  as  by  the  descriptions  of -manners  in  the 
comedies,  etc.,  which  have  reached  us  from  that  epoch. 
In  proportion  as  the  old  Roman  spirit  and  courage 
declined,  did  violence  and  rowdyism  increase.  Among 
the  various  deleterious  influences  of  slavery  on  slave- 
holders, also,  two  which  are  very  noticeable  at  that 
remote  time,  may  again,  after  the  lapse  of  ages,  be  ob- 
served under  our  own  eyes:  slavery  either  emascu- 
lates the  slaveholder  physically  and  mentally,  and 
thus  renders  him  cruel  from  effeminacy ;  or  else  makes 
him  rude  and  reckless,  and  full  of  a  coarse  and  savage 
ferocity. 

The  Roman  oligarchs  had  all  the  polish  reflected 
from  general  culture  covering  the  most  depraved 
minds ;  and  this  told  upon  their  politics  as  well  as 
upon  their  domestic  economy.  As  early  as  the  time 
of  Jugurtha,  nearly  all  the  senators  were  venal ;  and 
subsequently,  those  who  preserved  individually  some 
of  the  better  Roman  characteristics,  became  even 
more  rare.  Such  an  one,  toward  the  end  of  the  re- 
public, was  Sextus  Roscius,  whom  history  mentions 
for  his  good  treatment  of  his  bondmen.  Whenever  a 
special  class  of  society  becomes  anywhere  predomi- 
nant, a  special  type  of  character  is  formed  as  the  stand- 
7 


146  SLAVEKY  IN  HISTORY. 

ard  of  honor,  which,  however,  is  generally  quite  dif 
ferent  from  the  true  standard  of  an  honest  man  or  an 
upright  citizen.  But,  false  criterions  aside,  the  Slave 
States  may,  and  undoubtedly  do,  possess  many  honor- 
able planters  and  citizens,  as  Carroll  of  Carrollton 
or  Aiken  and  Preston  of  South  Carolina:  but  none 
of  these  men  give  tone  or  character  to  the  ^manners 
or  the  laws  ;  their  influence  is  not  permitted  in  Con- 
gress or  the  state  legislatures,  nor  are  their  opinions 
reflected  in  the  press  or  in  the  sham  literature  and 
science  of  their  section.  But  the  customs  and  man- 
ners which  now  prevail,  the  laws  enacted,  the  utter- 
ances of  statesmen,  the  condition  of  science  and  lit- 
erature, and  the  statements  of  the  current  press,  con- 
stitute the  evidence  from  which  the  social  condition 
of  the  nation  is  to  be  judged  now,  and  the  historic 
evidence  from  which  it  will  be  judged  by  future  gen- 
erations. 

The  slaveholding  oligarchy  triumphed  over  Marius 
and  Sertorius  as  it  triumphed  over  the  Gracchi.  And 
the  Roman  republic  expired  composed  of  slaveholders, 
capitalists,  and  beggars.  The  fury  of  the  indignant 
and  impoverished  people  carried  Caesar  to  power  over 
the  carcasses  and  the  ruins  of  the  oligarchy,  which  long 
before  had  reduced  the  liberty  and  the  name  of  the 
Roman  people  to  a  sham  and  a  mockery.  Domestic 
slavery  for  several  centuries  undermined  the  Roman 
republic,  and  its  corrosive  action  increased  with  the 
most  brilliant  periods  of  conquest,  just  as  the  human 
body,  though  gnawed  internally  by  a  chronic  disease, 


ROMANS:    REPUBLICANS.  147 

may  exhibit,  for  a  longer  or  shorter  period,  all  the 
appearances  of  health  and  vigor.  Oligarchs,  slave- 
holders, and  capitalists  destroyed  a  republic  founded 
by  intelligent  and  industrious  agriculturists,  yeomen, 
and  freeholders. 

More  than  one  point  of  analogy  exists  between  the 
Roman  and  American  republics.  Independent  and 
intelligent  small  farmers,  with  artisans,  mechanics, 
etc.,  were  the  founders  of  American  independence. 
And  the  free  states  have  not  only  preserved  but  ele- 
vated to  a  higher  social  and  political  significance  the 
original  characteristics  of  her  existence ;  and  the  re- 
proaches hurled  by  the  militant  pro-slavery  oligarchs 
against  the  free  farmers  and  operatives  in  the  fields 
and  workshops  of  the  north  are  sacrilegious  to  liberty 
and  light.  Even  so  the  prince  of  darkness  curses  the 
god  of  day ! 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  149 

XIII. 
KOMANS— POLITICAL  SLAVES. 

IT  was  an  easy  matter  to  engraft  despotism  upon  a 
society  morally,  politically,  and  economically  ruined 
by  the  slaveholding  oligarchy.  The  Caesars  and  the 
emperors  inaugurated  and  developed  it,  and  at  that 
time  nothing  else  would  have  suited  Rome.  Domestic 
slavery  had  destroyed  the  republican  spirit,  and  the 
vitality  of  ancient  republican  institutions.  The  political 
condition  of  the  empire — that  world-ruling  despotism 
— under  the  Caesars  and  the  emperors*  was  the  legiti- 
mate result  of  chattelhood  and  of  oligarchism.  Po- 
litical and  domestic  slavery  now  went  hand  in  hand, 
both  of  them  supreme  over  man  and  society. 

During  the  reign  of  the  six  Caesars,  rural  as  well  as 
urban  slavery  rapidly  began  to  be  reduced  to  method 
and  to  legal  forms*  Augustus  tried  to  modify  some- 
what the  cruel  treatment  of  the  slaves  :  he  abolished, 
for  instance,  the  custom  of  branding  their  cheeks  with 
a  hot  iron,  and  ordered  instead  that  they  should  wear 
metallic  collars.  It  came  into  vogue,  also,  that  a 
woman  who  had  given  birth  to  three  children  was  free 
from  hard  labor  the  rest  of  her  life ;  if  she  had  four 
she  became  wholly  free. 

*  The  Caesars  proper  end  with  Nero,  and  then  begin  the  emperora  of 
various  families  and  even  nationalities. 


SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

;The  slave  traffic  was  very  active  over  all  the  im- 
perial Roman  world  during  the  whole  period  of  its 
existence,  and  was  the  most  lucrative  branch  of 
commerce.  It  was  also  strictly  adjusted  by  police 
regulations. 

Augustus  likewise  made  efforts  to  morally  re- 
invigorate,  so  to  speak,  the  decaying  oligarchy  ;  but 
this  attempt  was  even  more  unsuccessful  than  the 
former.  Every  person  who  is  even  slightly  acquaint- 
ed with  history  must  be  familiar  with  the  absolute 
degradation  of  the  oligarchs,  capitalists,  and  rich 
slaveholders  of  imperial  Rome.  Tiberius  despised 
them  and  tyrannized  over  them  with  a  cold-blooded 
and  contemptuous  cruelty  only  equalled  by  the  man- 
ner in  which  they  crushed  their  chattels,  or  the  pop- 
ulace of  Rome,  whom  they  had  impoverished  and  de- 
graded. For  then,  as  for  centuries  before,  the  oligarchy 
looked  with  as  much  contempt  on  the  working-classes 
as  the  modern  slave-drivers  do  on  "  greasy  mechanics." 
But,  in  the  eye  of  history  and  humanity,  it  is  the 
"  greasy  mechanics"  and  "  stnall-fisted  farmers"  of  the 
free  states  who  are  the  glorious  lights  which  redeem 
the  dark  side  of  American  polity  as  embodied  in 
the  slave-driving  chivalry. 

In  fact,  the  Roman  oligarchs  were  far  more  degraded 
than  their  chattels.  "  Turpis  adulatio  Senatus"  said 
Tacitus ;  and  the  names  of  Druses,  Germanicus,  Bri- 
tannicus,  Chserea,  Trasea.  and  a  few  others,  can  never 
redeem  the  infamy  of  a  whole  community. 

The  numbers  of  slaves  owned  by  the  wealthy,  was, 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  151 

as  it  were,  proportionate  to  their  degradation.  Atlie- 
nseus  says  that  some  rich  men  had  from  ten  to  twenty 
thousand  slaves,  and  the  statement  is  confirmed  by 
Seneca.  Csecilius  Isidorus,  a  rich  particulier  living 
under  Augustus,  lost  a  great  part  of  his  fortune  in 
the  civil  wars,  and  yet  left  by  will  4116  chattels ; 
Elius  Froculus,  on  his  estates  in  Liguria,  had  two 
thousand  slaves  able  to  bear  arms ;  Scaurus,  a  wealthy 
senator,  owned  4116  chattels,  exclusive  of  shepherds 
and  tillers;  Eumolpus,  a  simple  citizen — not  one  of 
the  oligarchs  or  F.  F.  Y.'s  of  that  time,  but  rather  a 
parvenu — had  so  large  a  number  of  slaves  on  his  es- 
tates in  Numidia,  that  with  an  army  of  them  he  could 
have  stormed  and  taken  the  city  of  Carthage,  which, 
although  reduced  from  its  former  grandeur,  was  still 
among  the  first  cities  of  Africa.  Under  Nero,  half 
of  Africa  was  owned  by  six  slaveholders:  Nero 
slaughtered  them  and  inherited  their  estates. 

Such  was  the  rapidly  developed  internal  condition 
of  the  Roman  state  when  Pliny  dolefully  exclaimed : 
"  Latifundi  perdidere  Italiam  moxque  provinpias  ;" 
"  Large  extended  estates  (cultivated  by  slaves),  ruined 
Italy,  and  soon  after  the  provinces,"  as  even  Spain 
and  Gaul  were  quickly  devoured  by  the  large  slave- 
holders. 

The  condition  and  treatment  of  the  slaves  inspired 
pity  even  in  a  Claudius.  He  prohibited  the  custom 
of  starving  to  death  the  old  and  disabled  slaves,  who 
had  generally  been  exposed  on  an  island  in  the  Tiber, 
upon  which  was  a  temple  of  Esculapius.  By  the 


152  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

Clandian  edict,  such  exposition  was  equivalent  to 
'emancipation.  Even  Nero  had  some  pity  for  the 
slaves,  though  he  had  none  for  their  masters.  The 
emperors  were  terrified  at  the  increased  ravages  of 
slavery,  which  spread  in  continually  wider  and  wider 
circles  over  Gaul  and  Spain  as  well  as  in  Africa  and 
in  the  east.  Edicts  were  issued  by  several  emperors 
— as  Adrian  and  the  Antonines — designed  to  stay  the 
spread  of  slavery  and  alleviate  the  condition  of  the 
chattels.  These  edicts  encouraged  manumissions  either 
absolute  and  immediate,  or  gradual,  and  conferred 
the  same  municipal  rights  as  were  enjoyed  by  the 
enfranchised.  The  latifundia,  or  large  estates,  never- 
theless, still  increased  their  size ;  and  the  condition 
and  relations  of  landed  property  required  new  laws 
and  new  legal  definitions,  which  were  gradually  in- 
troduced into  the  jus  civile.  First  in  order  were  the 
common  usages  of  the  people,  and  then  the  legaliza- 
tion of  their  customs.  Thus  it  is  not  till  toward  the 
end  of  the  second  Christian  century  that  there  are 
found  in  the  Roman  law  definitions  of  slaves  as  per- 
sons attached  perpetually  to  the  soil.  But  their  classi- 
fication was  so  complicated,  that  it  becomes  difficult, 
if  not  impossible,  to  define  distinctly  the  various 
grades,  or  to  exhibit  clearly  the  features  in  which  one 
differs  from  another.  The  necessities  of  the  imperial 
treasury  were  probably  the  cause  of  such  divisions  as 
those  of  adscriptitii,  censiti,  perpetui,  conditionales,  co- 
loni,  inguilini — both  of  old  republican  origin — sim- 
pliceSi  originarii,  homologi^  tmbutari^  addicbi  glebce. 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  153 

agricolce,  aratores,  rustici  actores,  etc.  In  course  of 
time,  also,  all  these  names  were  merged  under  the 
general  denomination  of  serfs,  which  again  assumed 
various  degrees  of  oppression  and  servitude. 

Augustus  is  proverbially  said  to  have  pacified  the 
world ;  and  indeed,  with  few  exceptions,  the  Roman 
empire  enjoyed  internal  peace  during  the  first  two 
Christian  centuries.  But  under  Clafldius,  during  the 
war  with  Tiridates  of  Pontus,  the  entire  population 
of  some  of  the  captured  cities  was  sold  into  slavery, 
as  were  also  one  hundred  thousand  Jews,  when  Jeru- 
salem fell  under  Yespasian.  There  were  now,  how- 
ever, no  more  rich  cities  or  cultivated  countries  to  be 
Conquered,  no  peoples  to  be  enslaved  by  millions, 
as  there  had  been  under  the  republic;  wars  now 
were  waged  only  on  the  outskirts  of  the  empire,  and 
generally  with  barbarous  nations.  Prisoners  of  war, 
captives  and  subdued  barbarians,  were  no  longer  sold 
into  slavery,  but  the  emperors  colonized  the  waste 
lands  with  them.  They  thus  attempted  to  repeople 
Italy  and  the  provinces,  and  to  revive  the  ancient 
mode  of  rural  economy,  as  also  to  increase  the  rev- 
enue of  the  imperial  treasury.  Such  colonizations 
were  frequent  after  the  time  of  Marcus  Aurelius. 
But  all  this  could  not  stop  the  growth  of  the  social 
cancer.  Chattelhood,  encouraged,  as  will  be  shown 
by  political  slavery  and  taxations,  was  wildly  ram- 
pant,, and  overleaped  every  barrier  to  its  progress 
which  the  emperors  attempted  to  raise. 

During  the  whole  epoch  of  the  growth  and  maturi- 


154:  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

ty  of  domestic  slavery  in  Rome,  no  one  of  her  mor- 
alists, philosophers,  poets,  priests  or  satirists  ever 
preached  or  sang  of  the  idyllic  beauties  of  slavery; 
none  of  her  statesmen  considered  it  as  the  foundation, 
corner-stone  or  cement  of  society  or  of  the  empire, 
or  even  as  "ennobling"*  to  the  slaveholder,  and  ora- 
tions and  discourses  in  exaltation  of  human  bondage 
were  unknown.*  Pliny,  Seneca  and  Plutarch  only 
spoke  of  it  in  extenuating  language. 

The  Roman  jurisconsult  of  the  better  times  of 
the  empire  crystallized  into  legal  form  the  sense 
of  justice  and  equity  inherent  in  the  Roman,  nay, 
in  human  society.  He  expounded  the  law  for  the 
de  facto  existing  society,  and  therefore  generally  in 
favor  of  the  owner,  slaveholder,  etc.,  and  against 
the  thing,  the  res,  which  was  the  chattel.  The  ob- 
ject of  the  Roman  law  was  only  to  regulate  exist- 
ing relations,  and  such  was  domestic  slavery.  But 
with  all  its  unbending  severity,  the  Roman  law, 
through  the  conscientious  voice  of  the  Roman  juris- 
consult, declared  slavery  a  condition,  "qua  quis  do- 
minio  alieno  contra  naturam  subiicitur"  and  rarely 
missed  an  occasion  to  favor  the  slave,  to  alleviate  his 
status,  and  to  facilitate  his  emancipation.  No  clause 
or  decision  of  the  law  re-enslaved,  in  any  case,  the 
chattel  once  emancipated.  Even  if  a  will  provided  for 
the  emancipation  of  a  slave  in  terms  like  these :  "  I 
will  and  command  that  my  slave  A  becomes  free  ;  but 
upon  condition  that  he  live  with  my  son,  and  if  he  re- 

*  See  speech  of  Senator  Mason  of  Virginia. 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  155 

fuses  or  neglects  to  do  this  he  returns  to  slavery,  the 
law  decided,  that  "  A,  being  emancipated  by  the  first 
paragraph  of  the  will,  cannot  be  re-enslaved  by  the 
subsequent  conditional  paragraph ;  therefore  A  is  free, 
and  he  may  or  may  not  fulfil  the  condition." 

The  child  also  followed  the  condition  of  the  mother 
when  born  from  illicit  intercourse,  nisi  lex  specialis 
alius  inducit.  If  the  father  was  a  slave  and  the  moth- 
er a  free  woman,  the  child  was  free,  quid  non  debet 
calamitas  matris  ei  noceri  qui  in  utero  est — "  the  mis- 
fortune of  the  mother  shall  not  bear  on  the  product 
of  the  womb."  A  change  of  the  status  of  the  mother 
from  liberty  to  slavery  during  pregnancy  was  always 
construed  favorably  to  the  child,  who  thus  might  be 
born  free  if  the  mother  was  free  for  even  the  shortest 
time  during  the  period  of  pregnancy. 
1  Under  the  emperors,  freemen  began  to  sell  them- 
selves into  slavery — a  thing  unknown  during  the  ex- 
istence of  the  republic.  But  a  freeman  who  sold 
himself  into  slavery,  if  afterward  manumitted,  could 
not  become  again  a  full  citizen.  And  whoever  was 
once  emancipated  could  on  no  pretence  be  re-enslaved, 
under  penalty  of  death. 

Modern  pro-slavery  legislators  and  jurisconsults 
boldly  overthrow  all  these  Roman  ideas  of  justice 
and  equity. 

The  law  established  various  just  causes  for  emanci- 
pation. Among  these  were,  natural  relationships,  as 
children,  brothers,  sisters,  mothers,  cousins,  grand- 
parents, etc.,  when  slaves ;  and  whoever  ad  impudi- 


156  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

citiam  turpemque  molationem  servos  compellat^  lost 
his potestas,  or  power,  over  the  slave. 

These  facilities  for  emancipation  operated  principal- 
ly in  favor  of  the  urban  chattels,  or  those  of  the 
household  proper,  and  also  rural  overseers,  but  were 
rarely  applied  to  the  rural  slaves ;  consequently,  dur- 
ing the  most  brilliant  period  of  the  existence  of  the 
empire,  the  cities  were  filled  with  enfranchised  slaves 
of  various  kinds  and  various  nations.  The  country, 
too,  was  altogether  abandoned  by  the  slaveholders, 
who  lived  and  rioted  in  the  imperial  city.  Most  of 
these  emancipated  slaves,  as  also,  indeed,  many  of  the 
free-born  citizens,  finally  lost  their  liberty  by  the  op- 
eration of  those  causes  which,  notwithstanding  eman- 
cipations and  state  colonizations,  continually  increased 
the  latif  undia  or  large  estates,  and  transformed  into 
bondmen  the  freeholders  as  well  as  those  who  rented 
land  from  the  state  or  from  private  individuals. 

The  civil  administration  of  the  Roman  empire, 
heathen  and  Christian,  down  to  its  last  agonies  in 
Constantinople,  may  be  very  briefly  summed  up :  it 
was  fiscality.  Every  administrative  measure  aimed 
at  replenishing  the  imperial  exchequer.  The  imperial 
treasury  was  bottomless,  and  its  owners  cold,  rapa- 
cious, cruel  and  insatiable.  All  the  colonizations  of 
free  laborers  had  for  their  single  aim  but  to  increase 
the  income  of  the  state ;  and  tributes  and  taxations 
of  every  conceivable  kind  were  imposed,  first  upon 
the  provinces,  and  in  dburse  of  time,  on  Italy  itself. 
These,  of  course,  were  principally  supplied  by  the  la- 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  157 

boring  classes  in  the  cities  and  on  the  lands.  The  ra- 
pacity of  the  state  was  heightened  also  by  the  indi- 
vidual greed  of  the  magistrates,  from  the  prefects 
down  to  the  meanest  military  or  political  official  or 
tax-gatherer;  indeed, locusts  more  destructive  than  the 
Roman  officials  never  devoured  the  fruits  of  toil  or 
the  accumulations  of  industry.  These  fiscal  measures 
and  lawless  extortions,  fostered  chattelhood  almost  as 
much  as  wars  and  conquests  had  formerly  done. 

The  inquilini  and  coloni  of  the  last  century  of  the 
republic  were  free,  rent-paying  farmers  (who  paid  the 
rent  in  money),  or  free  laborers.  When,  after  the  time 
of  Sylla,  the  republican  oligarchs  partially  enslaved 
these  farmers,  the  rent  had  to  be  paid  in  kind,  in  sign 
of  dependence,  if  not  of  absolute  bondage.  The  col- 
onists settled  by  the  emperors  also  had  to  pay  tribute 
and  submit  to  various  other  servitudes ;  and  thus  the 
once  free  colonists  were,  by  a  slow  but  uninterrupted 
process,  transformed  into  bondmen,  serfs  and  slaves. 
As  in  the  last  days  of  the  republic,  so  under  Augustus 
and  his  successors,  the  free  yeoman  or  colonist,  in 
order  to  avoid  being  violently  expelled  from  his  home- 
stead and  shut  up  in  the  ergastulum  with  the  chattels, 
frequently  sold  himself  and  his  little  property,  on 
certain  conditions,  to  the  rich  and  powerful  slave- 
holder, and  thus  secured  patronage  and  protection. 
In  proportion  as  exaction,  oppression  and  lawlessness 
increased  under  the  emperors,  so  also  did  the  forced 
or  voluntary  submission  of  colonists  to  influential 
slaveholders.  As  the  imperial  tax-gatherer  was  wont 


158  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

to  sell  the  children  of  the  poor  for  tax  or  tribute,  the 
peasant  often  preferred  to  become  a  slave  in  order  to 
obtain  protection  from  his  master,  who  became  re- 
sponsible to  the  treasury  for  the  taxes  of  the  bond- 
man and  his  lands.  Frequently  whole  villages  of 
colonists  thus  gave  up  their  rights  for  the  sake  of 
patronage  and  protection. 

The  exchequer  had  a  roll  inscribed  with  the  names 
of  all  the  colonists  on  the  domains  belonging  to  the 
state,  the  cities,  or  to  private  individuals.  From  this 
census  for  taxation  was  derived  the  legal  designation, 
and  afterward  the  condition  of  adscriptus.  And  the 
imperial  government,  whose  sole  object  was  to  gather 
taxes  and  have  responsible  tax-payers,  had  little  if 
any  objection  to  this  transformation  of  colonists  and 
their  homesteads  into  the  bondmen  of  the  rich.  The 
change  was  not  made  at  once  by  any  special  law,* 
but  was  brought  about  by  the  slow  progress  of  social 
decomposition.  When  the  serfdom  of  the  colonists 
first  became  an  object  of  jurisprudence — a  little  before 
and  under  Theodosius — it  had  already  existed  as  a 
fact;  B&de&facfo  nasciturjus  was  an  old" axiom  of 
the  civil  law.  By  and  by  slaves  proper — that  is,  mov- 
able chattels,  not  persons  attached  to  the  soil — both  in 
the  city  and  on  the  lands,  wrere  taxed  on  the  planta- 
tion roll ;  and  Constantine  prohibited  the  sale  of 
chattels  from  one  province  to  another,  most  probably 

*  So  to-day  no  law  creates  or  gives  a  definition  of  "saud-hillers," 
"  clay-eaters,"  and  other  brutalized  poor  whites  in  the  South,  who  are 
rapidly  approaching  slavery. 


ROMAN'S:    POLITICAL  SLAVES.  159 

•with  the  view  of  facilitating  their  control  by  the  tax- 
gatherer. 

Rapacious  taxation,  the  first  outgrowth  of  imperial 
despotism  which  was  originated  by  the  slaveholders, 
forced  into  the  grip  of  the  oligarch  all  that  remained 
of  free  soil  and  independent  labor,  or  what  was  in- 
tended to  be  such  by  the  colonizing  emperors.  The 
sume  cause  also  disorganized  the  ancient  municipal 
regime  in  the  cities  of  Italy  and  throughout  the 
Roman  world. 

The  curia  of  Italian  cities,  and  afterward  of  all 
other  cities  privileged  with  Italian  law,  constituted 
the  body  politic  of  each  municipality.  The  most  in- 
fluential and  wealthy  citizens,  therefore,  were  curiales  ;  • 
next  to  them  were  municipes,  common  burghers,  small 
traders,  etc. ;  then  clients,  free  plebeian  proletarians, 
the  enfranchised,  etc.  The  decurions  or  city  senate, 
and  other  dignitaries  called  patrons,  protectors,  etc., 
administered  the  affairs  of  the  city ;  these  and  all  other 
offices  were  light  and  honorable  while  the  cities  were 
flourishing,  as  in  the  first  two  centuries  of  the  empire ; 
but  even  then,  various  legal  immunities  released  cu- 
riales  from  performing  public  municipal  service.  Dii- 
ring  the  peace  enjoyed  by  the  Roman  world  in  the 
early  times  of  the  empire,  the  taxes,  tolls,  excises, 
venalicium,  etc.,  imposed  on  Italianized  cities,  were 
moderate.  These  cities  were  then  rich  ;  they  accu- 
mulated and  loaned  capital ;  they  owned  slaves  and  ex- 
tensive domains.  By  means  of  their  slaves  they  erected 
those  public  edifices  and  monuments  whose  splendor 


160  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY 

rivalled  those  of  Rome  and  whose  ruins  are  still  in 
many  places  preserved  ;  and  the  administration  of  the 
revenues  and  the  honors  of  the  city  were  in  the  con- 
trol of  rich  oligarchs  and  slaveholders.  The  same 
accumulation  of  wealth  in  the  hands  of  a  few,  existed 
in  the  cities  as  in  the  country,  as  the  same  oligarchs 
generally  lived  in  the  city,  and  indeed  necessarily  be- 
longed to  some  municipium  /  for  in  the  Roman  world 
the  whole  political  and  civic  status  was  exclusively 
embodied  in  and  bestowed  on  the  city  ;  and  the  coun- 
try, as  such,  had  no  political  or  civil  significance. 

Thus,  even  during  the  most  brilliant  periods,  the 
numerous  free  persons  in  the  cities  became  more  and 
more  impoverished,  and  lived  by  panem  et  circenses, 
as  in  Rome.  Under  this  deceitful  glitter,  the  dis- 
ease slowly  undermined  the  prosperity  of  the  cities, 
and  the  first  shock  revealed  the  terrible  reality. 
Soon  fiscal  rapacity  seized  hold  of  every  thing  both 
in  the  Italian  and  Italianized  cities.  Not  only  the 
poorer  classes  but  even  the  wealthy  began  to  feel 
it.  One  after  another  the  cities  lost  their  domains 
and  their  treasure,  and  thus  lost  the  means  to  sus- 
tain their  internal  administration.  "With  the  grow- 
ing imperial  rapacity  increased  also  the  danger  and 
the  difficulties  of  public  office,  as  the  decurions  and 
other  officials  were  responsible  to  the  imperial  treas- 
ury for  all  the  taxes  and  imposts  levied  upon  the  city. 
The  rich  men,  patrons,  etc.,  now  used  extensively  their 
right  of  exemption  from  office,  and  excused  themselves 
from  public  service  in  proportion  as  the  fiscal  pressure 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  161 

increased,  and  as  they  found  it  more  lucrative  to  profit 
from  general  calamities  than  to  attempt  to  avert  them. 
Besides,  taxes  for  the  central  exchequer  were  to  be  im- 
posed and  levied  as  well  as  taxes  for  the  local  adminis- 
tration of  the  cities.  All  this  finally  almost  entirely 
crushed  the  impoverished  burghers,  and  in  the  second 
century  large  numbers  of  burghers  were  inscribed  in 
the  curia.  First  the  poorer  shopkeepers,  artisans,  and 
small  property  holders,  and  then  almost  all  the  wles, 
with  the  exception  of  the  infames — that  is,  those  who  at 
any  time  had  undergone  any  infamous  condemnation — 
became  curiales.  Taxes  on  lands,  houses,  and  slaves, 
and  also  on  persons  (per  capita),  increased  almost 
daily,  and  were  imposed  under  various  guises  and 
new  names.  All  handicraftsmen,  tradesmen,  and 
merchants,  had  to  pay  special  taxes,  and  the  poorest 
plebeian  had  to  pay  a  capitatio  or  illatio.  "When  the 
cities  had  thus  been  reduced  to  poverty,  and  were  ob- 
liged to  tax  themselves  heavily  to  sustain  their  exist- 
ence, the  severest  of  all  labor  was  to  be  a  city  official, 
and  every  one  tried  to  avoid  public  honors,  as  even  to 
be  a  curialis  was  considered  a  heavy  calamity.  The 
surplus  of  the  poor  free  population,  no  longer  sup- 
ported by  the  magistrates  or  decuriones,  abandoned  the 
cities  and  became  colonists  on  the  imperial  domains,  on 
the  remaining  city  domains,  or  on  private  lands ;  and 
there  sank  deeper  and  deeper  into  the  mire  of  shivery. 
Soon  the  curiales  began  to  follow  the  plebeians,  in 
order  to  escape  from  their  privileges  and  dignities. 
With  this,  however,  an  imperial  edict  interfered,  and 


162  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

small  proprietors,  curiales,  etc.,  were  prohibited  from 
selling  their  property.  The  eventual  acquirer  of  such 
property  was  made  ipso  facto  curial,  and  responsible 
for  both  past  and  current  taxes,  and  the  other  exactions 
and  servitudes  imposed.  The  law  put  various  other 
impediments  on  the  personal  liberty  of  poor  but  tax- 
able curiales  :  they  became  bondmen  of  the  state  or 
of  their  own  municipality  ;  they  could  not  change 
their  residence,  and  suffered  innumerable  annoyances. 
The  curiales,  thus  goaded,  often  preferred  even  the 
hateful  military  service  on  the  utmost  frontiers  of  the 
empire:  they  voluntarily  entered  the  legions,  in 
order  to  be  exempted  from  taxation  and  the  grip  of 
the  imperial  and  municipal  tax-gatherer.  More  of 
them,  however,  chose  rather  to  seek  patrons,  and  be- 
came bondmen  to  the  rich,  the  slaveholders,  and 
exempted  persons,  giving  both  themseves  and  their 
property  to  their  protectors.  Thus  frequently  the  im- 
poverished descendants  of  former  honoratiores  became 
n'rst  bondmen  and  then  slaves.  During  that  long 
epoch  of  grinding  oppression  and  taxation,  the  divi- 
sion and  subdivision  of  the  community  into  classes 
and  grades  originated.  This  classification  was  based 
on  pursuits  and  occupations,  and  also  according  to  the 
imposts  levied  on  each  class,  from  the  magnate — as 
the  rich  social  successors  of  the  oligarchs  were  now 
called — down  to  the  lowest  laborer  and  chattel. 
Finally,  the  whole  property  in  the  Roman  world — 
the  country,  the  city,  the  lands,  houses,  and  slaves — 
was  centred  in  the  hands  of  a  few  magnates,  who 


ROMANS:  POLITICAL  SLAVES.  163 

owned  incalculable  numbers  of  colonists,  bondmen, 
serfs,  and  chattels. 

The  famous  Roman  legions  were  recruited  from  yeo- 
men, plebeians,  workmen  and  colonists;  in  one  word, 
from  the  free  population.  "When  freemen  diminished, 
foreigners  and  barbarians  were  hired  and  enrolled. 
Sylla's  military  murderers  were  in  great  part  Spanish 
Celts;  and  after  Sylla  and  Marius,  foreigners  entered 
more  and  more 'into  the  composition  of  the  Roman 
armies.  Caligula  had  a  kind  of  body-guard  composed 
of  Germans ;  and  soon  all  the  nations  conquered  by 
Rome  were  represented,  not  only  in  the  armies,  but 
even  under  the  imperial  canopy.  Then  arose  the  in- 
testine wars  for  imperial  power  carried  on  by  pre- 
tenders, each  proclaimed  by  some  province  or  legion. 
These  wars  resulted  in  slaughter,  devastation,  ruin 
and  universal  misery  ;  and  thus  enlarged  the  number 
of  slaves,  and  powerfully  revived  the  slave  traffic, 
which  survived  the  downfall  of  heathenism  and  the 
Roman  world. 

Domestic  slaveiy,  acting  through  long  centuries, 
brought  about  a  thoroughly  diseased  and  depraved 
condition  of  society,  which,  in  turn,  reacted  upon  its 
producing  cause,  exacerbating  and  intensifying  it. 
The  result  was,  that  domestic  slavery  quite  overmas- 
tered the  ancient  Roman  world.  At  the  melancholy 
period  of  Rome's  disruption,  the  high-souled,  patriotic 
citizen — that  compact  and  columnar  type  of  character 
— had  become  quite  extinct,  and  in  his  place  were 
large  slave-owners,  slave-drivers,  and  slave-traders. 
The  masters  and  protectors  of  Rome  were  foreigners 


164  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

and  barbarians.  The  slaveholders  could  not  defend 
the  empire,  and  beneath  them  was  a  degraded  popula- 
tion of  so-called  freemen,  and  millions  of  serfs  and 
slaves,  all  of  them  without  a  spark  of  love  for  their 
country,  and  destitute  even  of  material  incitements  to 
urge  them  to  defend  their  homes  or  uphold  the  existing 
condition  of  society.  None  of  them  had  any  interest 
to  sustain  their  slaveholding  masters  or  the  fiscality  of 
the  empire  ;  and  at  times  the  lower  classes,  the  slaves 
especially,  even  joined  the  invaders.  Thus,  when 
Alaric  appeared  before  Rome,  over  forty  thousand 
slaves  joined  his  camp. 

Such  was  the  condition  of  the  Roman  world  and 
its  western  provinces,  Spain  and  Gaul,  when  the  av- 
alanche from  the  north  burst  upon  it  with  its  torrent 
of  invaders.  The  oligarchic  slaveholders,  having 
destroyed  the  republic,  transmitted  to  the  Csesars  a 
society  which  had  through  their  means  become  utterly 
degenerate  and  depraved.  The  emperors,  in  their 
turn,  transmitted  to  the  new  era  a  \vorld  putrescent 
with  domestic  slavery.  Often  does  a  virus  eat  its 
way  so  deeply  into  a  healthy  organism,  as  to  change 
its  very  character  and  the  conditions  of  its  existence. 
Then  the  morbid  disorganization  becomes  an  appar- 
ently normal  condition,  until  finally  life  is  altogether 
extinct.  Such  was  the  effect  of  chattelhood  on  the 
Roman  world,  and  especially  on  Italy,  which  was  the 
soul  and  centre  of  the  system.  JSTor  does  it  require  any 
great  apprehension  to  see  how  the  tragic  analogy  holds 
in  the  case  of  the  Southern  States  of  the  North  Amer- 
ican confederacy. 


CHRISTIANITY.  165 


XIV. 

CHRISTIANITY:   ITS   CHURCHES   AND 
CREEDS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

General  History,  Ecclesiastical  History,  Councils,  Bulls,  etc. 

CHRISTIANITY  appeared  for  the  purpose  of  effecting 
a  regeneration  in.  man's  moral  nature ;  this  necessarily 
included  also  his  social  regeneration. 

The  primitive  Christians,  apostles,  and  martyrs,  by 
their  words,  actions,  and  death,  taught  charity,  broth- 
erly love,  .and  equality  before  God  ;  and  thus  slowly 
but  powerfully  undermined  slavery.  They  consoled 
in  every  possible  way  their  lowly  and  suffering 
brethren,  and  tried  to  inspire  the  slaveholders  with 
feelings  of  charity  and  benevolence  toward  their 
bondmen ;  but  as  the  apostles  did  not  attack  any 
prevalent  social  or  political  evil,  nay,  even  seemed 
to  countenance,  by  their  silent  recognition  or  their 
advice,  the  existing  imperial  despotism,  so,  for  ob- 
vious reasons,  they  could  not  directly  attack  domestic 
slavery  nor  proclaim  universal  emancipation.  They 
preached  to  slaves  and  slaveholders,  made  converts 
from  both,  and  considered  and  treated  both  as  equal 
before  God  and  the  law.  The  few  words  of  apostolic 
consolation  which  have  been  transmitted  to  us  as  re- 


166  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

ferring  especially  to  chattels,  logically  and  morally  con- 
tain a  condemnation  of  slavery,  for  it  is  only  misfortune 
and  evil  that  inspire  pity  or  require  consolation.  So 
that  the  apostles  and  primitive  Christians,  by  advising 
slaves  to  bear  their  yoke  patiently,  thereby  proclaimed 
slavery  to  be  an  evil,  like  any  of  the  sufferings,  losses, 
or  misfortunes  of  life. 

"When,  under  Constantine,  Christianity  was  embod- 
ied in  a  national  ecclesiasticism,  the  Church  watched 
more  directly  over  the  condition  of  the  slaves.  In 
various  ways  it  tried  to  alleviate  their  condition  and 
effect  their  manumission  ;  and  this  it  urged  the  more 
earnestly  as  the  Christians  belonged  mostly  to  the 
poorer  classes,  and  also  numerous  serfs  and  slaves. 

But  the  Church  had  now  become  a  material  fact, 
and  henceforward,  beside  its  legitimate  moral  aims,  it 
had  also  worldly  and  selfish  desires.  It  received  impe- 
rial and  private  donations,  became  a  large  proprietor 
of  lands,  and  therefore  also  a  holder  of  slaves  and  serfs. 
It  could  therefore  take  no  distinct  interest  in  emanci- 
pation, but  nevertheless  still  continued  to  inspire  slave- 
holders with  a  milder  spirit,  and  tried  to  prevent,  as 
far  as  possible,  the  slave  traffic,  at  least  in  Christian 
chattels. 

None  of  the  apostles,  fathers,  confessors,  or  martyrs 
of  the  Church  ever  affirmed  slavery  to  be  a  moral  and 
divine  institution,  or  ever  attempted  to  justify  it  in 
any  way.  These  primitive  Christians  and  holy 
fathers  never  once  thought  to  refer  to  the  curse  of 
Noah  as  a  justification  of  slavery.  The  Biblical  story 


CHRISTIANITY.  167 

of  Noah  and  his  curse  was  first  dragged  into  this 
question  by  the  feudalized  mediaeval  clergy,  to  justify 
the  enslavement,  not  of  black  Africans  but  of  white 
Europeans,  among  whom,  undoubtedly,  were  the  an- 
cestors of  many  blatant  American  supporters  of  the 
divine  origin,  on  Biblical  authority,  of  slavery. 

When  the  Roman  empire  was  broken  in  pieces  by 
the  northern  invaders,  the  body  of  the  Roman  Church 
and  clergy  belonged  to  the  subdued  and  enslaved  race. 
The  Franks,  Northmen,  and  Anglo-Saxons  were  then 
altogether  heathen  ;  but  many  of  the  invaders — as  the 
Visigoths  and  Ostrogoths,  the  Vandals,  Burgundians, 
Heruli,  and  Longobards — were  Christians ;  but,  being 
Arians  (Unitarians),  they  were  enemies  of  the  Trini- 
tarians, and  treated  the  Roman  clergy  as  they  did  the 
rest  of  the  subdued  population.  The  Roman  clergy, 
however,  finally  succeeded  in  superseding  the  Arian 
dogmas  by  their  own,  and  they  then  constituted  the 
sole  expounders  of  Christian  doctrine.  Moved  then 
by  the  Christian  spirit,  as  well  as  by  consanguinity 
with  the  enslaved  population,  they  never  failed  to  im- 
press on  the  conquerors,  whether  heathen  or  Christian, 
their  duties  to\tard  their  slaves.  They  also  continued 
to  promote  manumissions  by  declaring  them  me'ritori- 
ous  before  God.  These  manumissions  were  performed 
at  the  sacred  altar  with  all  the  pomp  and  impressive 
rites  of  the  Church,  and  were  often  extorted  from  the 
blaveholding  barbarian  in  his  last  agonies. 

As  before,  so  during  the  first  centuries  of  the  Ger- 
manic settlements  of  "Western  and  Southern  Europe, 


168  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

the  Church  never  recognized  the  right  of  one  man  to  en- 
slave another;  but  rather  through  the  voice  of  Gregory 
the  Great,  bishop,  pope,  or  saint,  reaffirmed  the  ancient 
axiom  of  the  Roman  jurist :  "  Homines  quos  db  initio 
natura  creavit  liberos — etjus  gentium  jugo  substituit 
servitutis."  The  efforts  of  Gregory  the  Great,  as 
also  those  of  his  predecessors  and  successors,  were 
directed  toward  stopping  the  infamous  slave  traffic, 
first  in  Christian  slaves,  and  then  in  Jews,  Mussulmans, 
and  all  heathen.  The  Roman  Church  and  its  leaders 
unceasingly  condemned  the  slave-trade,  and  the 
popes  menaced  with  excommunication  the  traffickers 
in  Mussulman  prisoners  in  Rome,  Lyons,  Yenice,  etc., 
as  also  those  Germans  who  afterward,  in  the  ninth, 
tenth,  and  eleventh  centuries,  enslaved  the  prisoners 
-of  war  which  they  made  among  the  Slavonic  tribes, 
Christian  and  heathen.  The  popes  have  likewise  per- 
petually condemned  the  African  or  negro  slave-trade, 
from  its  beginning  down  to  the  present  day.  Gregory 
XYI.  interdicts  "  all  ecclesiastics  from  venturing  to 
maintain  that  this  traffic  in  Slacks  is  permitted  under 
any  pretext  whatsoever ;"  and  prohibits  "  teaching  in 
public  or  in  private,  in  any  way  whatever,  any  thing 
contrary  to  this  apostolic  letter."  Explicit  words  of 
this  tenor,  coming  from  the  pope,  were  generally  con- 
sidered as  expressing  the  spirit  of  the  Papal  Church. 
In  the  Roman,  as  in  all  other  churches  and  sects,  how- 
ever, both  clergy  and  laity  were  wont  to  interpret  all 
such  mandates  according  to  their  own  convenience. 
For  reasons  formerly  alluded  to,  the  various  national 


CHKISTJUN1TY.  169 

ecclesiastical  councils  held  in  countries  politically  re- 
constructed by  German  invaders — as  Spain,  France, 
and  England — repeatedly  and  explicitly  legislated  on 
slavery.  These  councils  had  it  constantly  in  view  to 
moderate  the  general  treatment  of  slaves  and  bond- 
men, and  to  prevent  mutilation  and  other  cruel  modes 
of  punishment.  The  churches  were  proclaimed  in- 
violable places  of  refuge  for  fugitive  slaves,  and 
while  emancipation  was  urged  as  meritorious,  the 
enslavement  of  freemen  was  visited  with  excommu- 
nication. 

Soon,  however,  the  Church,  that  is,  the  priesthood 
and  hierarchy,  came  to  form  an  integral  part  of  the 
feudal  system.  The  higher  clergy  shared  the  public 
spoils,  and  had  fiefs  and  other  estates  stocked  with 
serfs  and  chattels.  Then  the  fervor  for  emancipation 
abated  ;  nevertheless,  the  clergy  generally  recommend- 
ed a  humane  treatment  of  the  enslaved.  The  Irish 
clergy  and  councils  perhaps  proved  themselves  the 
most  disinterested  at  that  early  mediaeval  epoch  :  they 
were  the  "underground  railroad"  of  the  period — 
assisting  in  the  escape  of  slaves  from  bondage ;  and  a 
council  held  in  Armagh  in  1172,  gave  liberty  to  all 
English  (that  is,  Saxon)  slaves  in  Ireland.  Nowadays, 
on  the  contrary,  the  immense  majority  of  the  Irish 
Roman  clergy  on  this  continent  support  and  sanction 
chattel  slavery. 

In  the  course  of  time  the  clerical  hierarchies,  mon- 
asteries, etc.,  inoculated  with  the  feudal  and  baronial 
spirit,  became  as  zealous  for  the  preservation  of  even 
8 


1TO  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

the  most  revolting  forms  of  servitude  imposed  upon 
the  bondmen,  as  the  most  rapacious  lay  barons  could 
possibly  have  been.  Nowhere  did  the  clergy  raise 
its  voice  for  either  a  total  or  a  partial  abolition  of 
bondage. 

Serfdom,  which  had  long  previously  vanished  from 
Italy,  was,  at  the  appearance  of  Luther,  on  the  point 
of  dissolution  in  England.  The  father  of  the  relig- 
ious reformation  of  Germany  rather  avoided  blending 
social  with  spiritual  reform ;  but  the  French  and 
Swiss  reformers,  as  well  as  the  anabaptists  and  other 
sects,  kept  especially  in  view  the  amelioration  of  the 
condition  of  the  oppressed  masses.  In  general,  the 
great  movements  for  a  freer  spiritual  activity  which 
characterized  the  sixteenth  century,  contributed  to 
promote  the  emancipation  of  serfs :  and  this  first  by 
purifying  and  elevating  the  public  conscience,  and  then 
by  bringing  about  the  secularization  of  church  prop- 
erty. The  state,  on  becoming  the  heir  of  the  clergy, 
was  everywhere  foremost  in  abolishing  servitude :  the 
ecclesiastical  corporation,  on  the  other  hand,  never 
labored  for  its  abolition. 

Among  the  various  religious  bodies — the  Quakers 
and  the  modern  Unitarians  excepted — the  absolute- 
ness of  Christian  doctrine  and  morals  has  always 
been  greatly  modified  by  worldly  interests.  Not 
the  Episcopal  nor  Scottish  churches,  nor  indeed  any 
other  denomination,  can  claim  the  merit  of  having 
begotten  the  noble  sentiment  so  universal  in  England 
on  the  subject  of  human  bondage.  The  Koman  clergy 


CHRISTIANITY.  171 

continues,  as  it  always  has  done,  to  oscillate  between 
duty  and  interest;  and  the  Various  Protestant  sects 
do  the  same.  And  it  is  a  significant  feature  that  in 
the  American  Union  almost  every  religious  denomi- 
nation has  its  pro-slavery  and  its  anti-slavery  factions. 


GAULS.  173 

XV. 
GAULS. 

AUTHORITIES: 
Ccesar,  Dieffenbach,  Picot,  Amadee  Thierry,  etc. 

THE  Gauls  (Gadhels,  Gaels  or  Gals),  a  branch  of 
the  Aryas,  were  the  first  historic  race  which  peopled 
Central  and  Western  Europe.  It  is  supposed  that  the 
Gauls  (afterward  wrongly  called  Kelts)  emigrated 
from  Asia  to  Europe  before  the  Greeks, .  Latins,  or 
Slavonians,  as  undoubtedly  they  did  long  previous  to 
the  Teutons  or  Germans.  Already,  in  prehistoric 
times,  from  the  regions  of  the  Danube  to  the  Atlantic, 
on  the  Alps  and  the  Pyrenees  as  well  as  on  the  Brit- 
ish and  Irish  islands,  these  first  wanderers  left  their 
marks  in  the"names  of  rivers  and  mountains.  Gallia 
(Gaul)  finally  became  their  home,  and  from  thence 
they  repeatedly  issued  forth  and  shook  the  ancient 
world,  ravaged  Greece  and  extended  their  empire  to 
Asia  Minor  on  the  east,  and  Italy  on  the  south.  They 
burnt  republican  Borne  in  its  very  infancy,  and  for 
centuries  the  Roman  republic  struggled  for  life  and 
death  with  them,  until  they  were  finally  subdued  by 
Caesar. 

The  whole  of  Gaul  was  occupied  by  tribes  more  or 
less  consanguineous,  and  their  internal  social  organi- 
zation was  in  many  respects  similar.  Caesar,  in  his 


174  SLAVEEY  IN  HISTORY. 

bird's-eye  view,  says  that  the  two  dominant  classes 
were  the  druids  and  nobles,  while  under  them  were 
the  "plebs,  pmne  servorcm  habetur  loco,  quceper  nihil 
audet  et  nullo  adhibitur  consiylio"  This  only  ex- 
plains the  absence  or  perhaps  dormancy  of  political 
rights.  "  Plerigue  (not  all,  it  will  be  noticed,  but 
many,  and  these  mainly  such  as  had  suffered  reverses 
of  fortune)  sesse  in  servitutem  DICANT  nobilibus — in 
hos  eadem  omnia  sunt  jura  quce  dominis  in  servis." 
This  latter  phrase  only  means  that  certain  relations 
between  the  chief  and  his  dependents  were  similar  to 
those  of  master  and  chattel — being  the  only  form  of 
servitude  known  to  Caesar,  who  did  not  understand 
the  tribal  organization  on  which  the  authority  of  the 
chief  was  based. 

Parke  Godwin,  in  his  highly  elaborate  and  valua- 
ble History  of  France,  says  very  justly  that  "the  Gallic 
society  was  a  mere  conglomeration  of  chieftains  and 
followers."  After  giving  a  picture  of  Gallic  family 
life  and  exhibiting  the  nature  of  the  chieftain's  power 
and  functions,  that  eminent  writer  thus  continues: 
"  The  other  members  of  the  clan  consisted  of  a  num- 
ber of  dependents  in  various  degrees  of  subordina- 
tion, and  of  adherents  whose  ties  were  more  or  less 
voluntary."  Among  the  dependents  were  "bond- 
men- (attached  to  the  soil),  debtor-bondmen,  obwrati, 
strangers  found  in  the  country  without  a  protector  or 
lord,  and  slaves,  captives  of  war  or  purchased  in  the 
open  market."  Thus  far  Parke  Godwin. 

Slaves,  if  indeed  such  existed  among  the  Gauls  at 


GAULS. 


175 


the  time  of  Caesar,  were  certainly  exceedingly  limited 
in  number,  and  chattelhood  was  not  an  inherent  con- 
dition of  any  part  of  the  people.  In  his  history  of 
his  long  wars  with  the  Gauls,  Caesar  makes  no  allusion 
to  a  slave-element  in  the  population — an  omission 
which  shows  how  insignificant  it  must  have  been. 

The  commercial  relations  of  the  Gauls,  with  the 
Phoenicians  and  with  the  Greek  colony  of  Massilia,  or 
Marseilles,  probably  tended  to  encourage  slavery 
among  them.  But  although  our  knowledge  of  their 
internal  relations  and  domestic  economy  is  very  scanty, 
there  are  a  few  facts  which  prove  that  domestic  sla- 
very was  hardly  even  in  an  embryonic  stage  at  the 
epoch  when  the  Gauls,  by  their  contact  with  Rome 
and  Caesar,  entered  the  general  current  of  history. 
The  Massaliotes  (or  colonists  established  at  Marseilles), 
trafficked  in  slaves.  They  also  had  them  in  their 
houses,  but  did  not  employ  them  on  lands  situated 
beyond  the  precincts  of  the  city.  For  field  laborers 
they  hired  the  Ligurians,  who,  at  given  seasons,  de- 
scended with  their  wives  from  the  mountains  and 
worked  for  wages.  Lands  belonging  to  Gallic  clans 
or  districts  were  no  more  worked  by  slave  labor  than 
were  the  fields  of  the  Massaliotes.  Even  in  the  house- 
holds of  the  chieftains  or  nobles,  domestic  slavery,  if 
it  existed,  must  have  been  hidden  from  sight.  Possi- 
donius,  tutor  of  Pompey,  Cicero,  and  other  eminent 
Romans,  gives  a  description  of  the  mode  of  life  and 
domestic  customs  of  the  Gauls,  in  whose  country  he 
travelled.  He  observed,  that  at  their  luxurious  feasts 


176  SLAVEKY  IN  HISTOKY. 

the  guests  were  served  by  the  children  of  the  family, 
instead  of  domestic  slaves ;  which  fact  authorizes  the 
conclusion  that  the  number  of  chattels  was  very  small, 
and  that  they  had  no  place  in  family  life-. 

Gallic  slaves  consisted  of  criminals,  vagabonds, 
foreigners  imported  from  Massilia,  and  prisoners 
of  war  principally  made  from  nations  beyond  the 
Alps  and  the  Rhine.  Even  after  the  invasion  aof 
the  Kimbri  and  Belgse,  Gaul  was  inhabited  by 
tribes  more  or  less  akin  to  each  other.  It  was  there- 
fore the  theatre  of  almost  uninterrupted  domestic  war 
between  tribes  and  federations.  But  when  one  tribe 
was  conquered  by  another,  the  subject  people  and  those 
who  escaped  the  fury  of  battle  were  not  reduced  to 
slavery,  but  simply  became  tributary,  and  received 
their  laws  from  the  conqueror.  Exceptions  to  this 
rule  must  have  been  exceedingly  rare.  If  an  invading 
tribe  was  subdued,  it  received  lands  and  was  obliged 
to  settle  among  the  conquerors.  The  founders  of 
Rome,  as  we  saw  (see  "  Romans :  Republicans"),  acted 
in  a  similar  manner.  Prisoners  of  war  were  absorbed 
into  the  clan,  and  were  held,  perhaps  exclusively  by  the 
chieftain,  in  the  condition  of  serfs  bound  to  the  soil, 
but  not  as  chattels  or  marketable  objects ;  and  they 
were  neither  deprived  of  personality  nor  the  rights  of 
family. 

The  arable  lands,  forests,  and  pasturages  were 
owned  by  the  clan  collectively — the  chiefs,  of  course, 
receiving  the  lion's  share  when  distributed  for  cultiva- 
tion ;  and  each  clan  lived  on  its  own  lands.  These 


GAULS.  1YT 

agricultural  clansmen  it  was  who  constituted  the  ter- 
rible armies  which,  under  various  Brenni  (chiefs,  lead- 
ers, kings),  so  often  terrified  and  scourged  almost 
the  whole  known  world. 

"With  the  increase  of  the  wealth  and  power  of  the 
chieftains,  their  relations  with  the  poorer  clansmen 
became  more  aggressive,  and  the  lands  were  held  by 
the  latter  under  conditions  more  and  more  onerous. 
But  when  Caesar  invaded  Gaul,  no  large  estates  (lati- 
fundia)  existed,  and  the  soil  was  in  the  hands  of  a 
numerous  peasantry  inspired  with  patriotism  and  love 
of  independence.  This  peasantry  flocked  to  the  stand- 
ard of  Vercingetorix,  and,  to  the  last,  sustained  him  in 
his  deadly  struggle  against  Caesar. 

The  living  acoustic  telegraph  used  by  the  Gauls 
during  the  wars  with  Caesar  is  another  proof  that  great 
estates  did  not  exist  in  Gaul,  and  that  the  soil  was 
tilled  by  freemen  possessed  of  homesteads :  for  each 
peasant,  from,  the  limit  of  his  homestead,  shouted  the 
news  to  his  next  neighbor,  he  to  the  next,  and  so  on ; 
and  thus  intelligence  was  swiftly  carried  hundreds  of 
miles  even  during  the  shortest  day  of  the  year.  An 
important  event  occurring  in  any  one  tribe  was  thus 
spread  in  a  twinkling  all  over  Gaul.  Now,  if  the 
country  had  been  divided  into  large  estates  worked  by 
slaves,  such  a  mode  of  communication  would  of  course 
have  been  impossible. 

As  the  clans  and  their  land  were  governed  by  chief- 
tains  and  nobles,  so  also  were  the  cities  under  oli- 
garchic rule.    The  free  population  in  the  cities  had 
8* 


178  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

no  independent  rights,  and  was  obliged  to  have  pa- 
trons. The  poor,  the  defenceless,  and  even  the  artisans, 
willingly  enrolled  themselves  for  life  under  the  client- 
ship  of  the  powerful  nobility,  depending  on  them  as 
the  rural  clansmen  depended  upon  the  chieftains  or 
rural  nobles.  But  the  condition  of  a  client  in  the  city 
was  not  hereditary  or  transmissible,  as  was  clanship  in 
the  country.  The  family  of  the  client  held  no  rela- 
tions of  dependency  upon  the  patron  ;  and  a  son  was 
not  bound  by  obligations  contracted  by  his  father. 
When  the  patron  died,  the  bonds  of  his  clients  were 
severed,  and  they  were  free  to  select  another  patron. 

Such  were  the  relations  between  the  chieftains  and 
clansmen,  between  the  nobility  and  the  people,  be- 
tween the  soil  and  its  tiller,  between  client  and  pa- 
tron, when  the  Romans  commenced  the  conquest  of 
Gaul.  Impoverishment,  debts  contracted  to  their 
chiefs,  and  exactions  of  one  kind  and  another,  may 
have  transformed  many  independent  clansmen  into 
partial  bondmen ;  but  they  always  preserved  their 
family  and  village  rights. 

After  the  numerous  evidences  already  pointed  out 
in  the  history  of  the  Greeks  and  Romans,  it  is  un- 
necessary here  to  show  how  similar  morbid  causes 
produced  correspondingly  destructive  effects  in  the 
crude  civilization  and  social  condition  of  the  Gauls. 
The  development  of  these  germs  brought  the  Gauls 
almost  to  serfdom,  if  not  yet  to  chattelhood,  at  the 
same  time  degrading  the  character  of  the  oligarchs — 
future  slaveholders — to  the  extent  described  by  Caesar. 


GAULS.  179 

This  perversion  of  the  internal  economy  of  the  Gauls 
prepared  them  for  domestic  slavery.  Thus  often  an 
insignificant  derangement  in  the  human  economy,,  or 
a  trifling  lesion  in  its  organism,  may  find  its  ultimate 
result  only  in  permanent  disorganization  or  in  death. 

The  Roman  conquest  and  the  subsequent  oppressive 
administration,  contributed  to  establish  the  same  re- 
lations between  the  population  in  Gaul  as  existed  in 
Italy  and  Spain,  and  which  have  been  already  de- 
scribed. The  city  (municipium)  became  all  and 
every  thing ;  the  clan,  the  district,  the  country  nothing. 
The  former  chiefs  of  the  clans  became  the  senators 
of  their  respective  centres.  The  imperial  Roman 
administration  favored  the  concentration  of  landed 
estates  into  a  few  hands,  and  consequently  the  impov- 
erishment of  small  landholders  and  free  laborers  and 
operatives  of  every  kind ;  and  thereby  greatly  in- 
creased the  growth  of  slavery.  The  collective  own- 
ership of  the  land  by  the  clan  and  its  chiefs  became 
wholly  transformed  into  the  individual  property  of 
the  chief,  who  was  now  also  a  municipal  senator  or 
magnate.  A  striking  analogy  to  this  is  found  in  the 
Highlands  of  Scotland,  which,  in  the  same  way  have 
become  the  property  of  a  few  powerful  families.  The 
Gallic  clansmen  before  being  transformed  into  chat- 
tels, first  became  tenants  (coloni) — similar  to  those  in 
imperial  Italy — of  their  chiefs  (or  tierns),  who,  on 
becoming  senators,  lived  in  the  cities,  and  were  sur- 
rounded, not  by  clients  and  clansmen,  but  by  slaves. 
The  estates  now  began  to  be  worked  by  bondmen  and 


180  SLAVEKY   IN  HISTORY. 

chattels,  and  thus  a  servile  population  succeeded  to 
the  free  and  sturdy  yeomanry  of  ancient  times. 

Not  without  a  struggle,  however,  was  this  accom- 
plished. The  oppressive  taxation,  the  tyranny  of  the 
domestic  oligarchs,  and  the  devastations  committed 
by  barbarians — the  vanguards  of  the  future  destroyers 
of  the  Roman  empire — generated  in  the  third  century 
the  repeated  insurrections  of  the  Bagaudes  (the  Gallic 
name  for  insurgent),  that  is,  of  the  peasantry  against 
the  cities.  All  the  oppressed  small  land-owners,  ten- 
ants, serfs  and  slaves  united  in  these  insurrections. 

The  slave  traffic  was  now  very  brisk.  The  Roman 
prefects,  tribunes,  etc.,  sold  the  prisoners  of  war  made 
in  the  German  invasions ;  while  the  Germans,  in  their 
turn,  when  successful,  carried  away  or  sold  their  booty 
to  the  human  traffickers  from  various  regions.  Thus 
Aurelian,  who  was  a  military  tribune  previous  to  be- 
coming emperor,  sold  several  hundred  Franks,  Suevians, 
etc.,  probably  in  the  city  of  Maguncia  (Mayence).  Soon 
the  forays  became  more  and  more  destructive,  and  for 
several  centuries  invasion  succeeded  invasion  until  the 
impoverishment  and  ruin  of  the  people  were  accom- 
plished. The  issue  of  a  long  train  of  interacting  social 
circumstances  was  the  same  in  Gaul  as  in  Italy  :  sen- 
ators and  oligarchs  owned  the  lands  and  the  cities, 
and  proudly  domineered,  while  the  rest  of  the  popula- 
tion sank  into  tenants,  serfs,  and  bondmen,  and  most 
of  them  into  chattels.  These  last  had,  of  course, 
nothing  to  defend  against  the  invaders,  who  even  at 
times  in  many  ways  alleviated  their  condition :  there^ 


GAULS.  181 

fore  the  invaders  were  often  received  with  open  arms 
by  the  enslaved  populations.  When  the  destroyers 
of  the  Eoman  rule  over  Gaul  finally  settled  therein, 
many  of  the  nobles  and  rich  magnates  understood  how 
to  ingratiate  themselves  with  their  new  masters,  and 
thus  shared  in  their  spoils  of  lands  and  slaves.  By 
far  the  greater  number,  however,  were  themselves 
ruined  and  enslaved. 

In  Gaul,  as  over  the  whole  ancient  and  Roman 
world,  not  the  slaveholders  but  their  slaves  survived 
the  general  destruction,  nay,  finally  stepped  into  the 
places  once  occupied  by  their  enslavers  and  masters. 


GERMANS.  183 

XYL 
GERMANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Tacitus,  Codex  Legum  Antiquorum  Barbarorum,  Jacob  Grimm,  Mentzel, 
Wirth,  Puetter,  Zimmerman,  etc. 

THE  Germans,  in  all  probability,  were  the  last  of  the 
Aryan  stock  who  immigrated  into  Europe.  History 
first  discovers  them  finally  settled  in  central  Europe  ; 
and  for  how  long  a  time  they  had  previously  roamed 
in  the  primitive  forests  of  these  regions  it  is  impossible 
to  conjecture.  With  the  exception  of  the  left  bank 
of  the  Rhine,  Switzerland,  and  the  northern  slopes  of 
the  Tyrolean  Alps — which  regions,  in  the*  course  of 
centuries  were  conquered  from  various  Keltic  tribes 
— the  Germany  proper  of  to-day  is  about  the  same 
as  when  Caesar  met  the  barbarians  on  the  Rhine. 
Then  the  Germans  were  rude  savages,  with  but  little 
agriculture ;  living  on  milk,  cheese,  and  flesh ;  and 
their  condition  was  in  many  respects  similar,  perhaps 
even  inferior,  to  that  of  the  Tartars,  Kalmucks,  and 
Bashkirs,  who  still  rove  over  northern  and  central 
Asia. 

Neither  clanship  nor  patriarchate  existed  among  the 
Germans,  but  the  rule  of  individual  will  strengthened 
by  the  family  ties.  Divided  into  numerous  tribes,  the 
Germans  seem  to  have  spent  many  centuries  in  hunt- 
ing the  wild  beasts  of  their  primitive  forests,  and  in 


184  SLAVERY   IN"   HISTORY. 

making  war  upon  each  other.  Most  probably  these 
almost  uninterrupted  domestic  wars  created  and  de- 
veloped aristocracy  and  slavery,  both  of  which  were 
firmly  established  among  the  Germans  when  they  first 
appear  on  the  record  of  history.  Among  the  European 
descendants  of  the  Aryas,  the  primitive  Germans  re- 
flect most  strikingly  the  Euphratic  story  of  Nimrod, 
"  the  strong,"  "  the  hunter,"  subduing  the  feeble  and 
preying  on  his  person  and  labor.  A  bitter  hatred  be- 
tween the  tribes  prevailed  from  time  immemorial ; 
and  consequently  feuds  and  wars  were  perpetual.  The 
conquered  was  compelled  to  labor  for  the  conqueror; 
and  thus  originated,  very  probably,  bondage  and  do- 
mestic slavery,  as  well  as  the  aristocratic  contempt 
which  the  fighting  part  of  the  population  had  for  the 
subdued  and  enslaved  laborers  of  a  tribe.  When  one 
German  tribe  subdued  another,  the  victors  either 
seized  on  the  lands  of  the  conquered  and  settled 
thereon,  transforming  the  former  occupants  into  bond- 
men ;  or,  if  they  did  not  settle  among  the  subdued, 
they  made  them  tributaries,  carrying  away  a  certain 
portion  of  the  population  as  slaves.  Thus  the  Ger- 
mans, in  their  wild  forests,  were  mainly  divided  into 
two  great  social  elements — the  freemen,  or  nobles, 
possessed  of  all  rights,  and  the  bondmen  possessed  of 
none.  But  all,  free  and  slave,  were  of  kindred  race 
and  lineage. 

All  the  German  dialects  have  a  specific  denomina- 
tion for  the  chattel.  Schalch,  scalch,  sclialk,  is  the 
word  for  slave,  and  seneschalk  for  the  overseer.  Af- 


GERMANS. 

terward,  in  mediaeval  times,  seneschalk  was  an  office, 
dignity,  or  title. 

Besides  wars  and  conquests,  there  were  other  sources 
which  fed  and  sustained  slavery :  thus  certain  crimes 
were  punished  with  slavery,  and  even  freemen  gambled 
away  their  liberty — a  custom  found  among  no  other 
race  or  nation  ;  a  freeman,  likewise,  could  at  any  time 
sell  himself  into  slavery.  Any  one  condemned  to 
compound  in  money  for  murder  or  any  other  offence, 
if  he  had  no  money,  gave  himself  as  a  slave  into  the 
hands  of  the  family  or  individual  whom  he  had  of- 
fended, or  to  the  man  who  loaned  him  money  to  pay 
the  composition.  The  sclialks  were  more  absolutely 
in  the  power  of  their  master  than  were  the  Roman 
slaves  under  the  empire,  or  even,  if  possible,  than  the 
chattels  of  the  American  slave  states.  Although 
Tacitus  says  that  masters  killed  their  slaves  only  when 
intoxicated  or  otherwise  maddened  with  passion,  the 
barbarian  codes  and  other  historic  evidence  show  that 
the  sclialks  were  treated  with  the  utmost  cruelty,  and 
even  subject  to  be  maimed  in  various  ways.  Some 
historians  who  hold  up  the  Germans  as  models  of 
social  and  civic  virtue,  attribute  this  cruelty  to  their 
contact  with  the  Romans,  whose  example  they  fol- 
lowed. But  the  influence  of  Roman  polity  on  Ger- 
many began  only  toward  the  end  of  the  fourth  cen- 
tury ;  and  many  of  the  northern  tribes,  as  the  Saxons, 
Frisians,  etc.,  did  not  come  under  the  influence  of 
Roman,  Christian,  or  any  foreign  civilization  till  about 
the  eighth  century.  Some  of  these  barbarian  codes 


186  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

were  written  when  the  barbarians  had  settled  on  the 
Roman  ruins ;  then,  undoubtedly,  they  incorporated 
some  Roman  ideas,  and  contained  laws  bearing  on 
existing  relations ;  but  still  they  were  principally  the 
embodiment  of  their  own  immemorial  usages.  The 
Yisigothic  code,  for  instance,  was  written  very  soon 
after  they  settled  in  Gaul  and  Spain,  long  before  the 
destruction  of  the  Western  empire,  and  consequently 
could  not  have  been  seriously  influenced  by  the  legal 
conceptions  or  customs  of  Rome. 

Tacitus  says  that  little  difference  existed  between 
the  mode  of  life  of  masters  and  slaves  :  Inter  eadem 
pecora  in  eadem  humo  degunt.  At  the  time  of  Dio- 
dorus  Siculus,  youthful  male  and  female  schalks  served 
at  the  tables  of  masters,  who  were  always  willing  to 
sell  them  for  a  jug  of  wine. 

In  this  primitive  epoch  of  German  historical  exist- 
ence, the  pride  of  blood  and  descent  seems  to  have 
been  deeply  ingrained  in  the  German  mind ;  and  there 
was  a  strong  aversion  against  corrupting  the  lineage 
by  intermarriage  with  a  schalk  man  or  woman,  even 
although  they  were  of  the  same  race  and  family. 
Among  the  Saxons  immemorial  custom  even  punished 
a  mesalliance  with  death.  Thus  the  very  ancestors  of 
many  American  slaveholders,  now  so  proud  of  their 
Saxon  blood,  were  considered  unworthy  of  marriage 
with  their  masters.  But  concubinage  with  slave 
women  was  then  common  (as  it  now  is  in  the  South), 
whatever  Tacitus  may  say  concerning  German  conju- 
gal fidelity.  The  bastards  of  parents  one  free  the 


GERMANS.  187 

other  slave,  became  serfs  to  the  soil.  If  a  freeman 
married  a  slave  woman,  their  children  were  schalks, 
and  sometimes  the  father  even  was  reduced  to  slavery. 
A  free  woman  marrying  a  slave,  might  be  killed  by 
her  parents  or  became  a  slave  of  the  king — when  the 
Germans  had  kings  in  their  new,  post-Roman  mon- 
archies. Most  of  these  cruel  legal  customs,  and  many 
others  found  in  the  codes,  belong  to  the  heathen  epoch, 
to  the  period  of  pure  Germanic  existence  unadultera- 
ted by  contact  with  the  corruptions  of  civilized  life. 
They  prove  how  deep  was  the  Germanic  contempt  for 
the  ignoble  or  unfortunate  among  their  own  brethren  ; 
they  show  also  the  very  ancient  appearance  of  slavery 
among  them,  and  its  violent  and  criminal  origin,  like 
that  of  slavery  always  and  everywhere. 

Ancient  usages  and  laws  regulating  inheritance 
perpetuate  themselves  remarkably  among  peoples  and 
nations.  From  their  forests  the  Germans  transplanted 
the  right  of  primogeniture  over  Europe.  The  land 
was  given  to  the  males,  while  the  daughters  received 
the  movables,  mancipia,  and  the  schalks — a  conclu- 
sive evidence  that  not  alone  bondage  to  the  soil,  but 
positive  chattelhood,  prevailed  in  the  primitive  forests 
of  Germany. 

Cities  and  organized  industry  had  then  no  exis- 
tence. Freemen,  i.  6.,  masters,  had  but  a  few  crude 
wants,  and  these  were  supplied  by  the  work  of  the 
schalks  in  the  dwelling  or  in  the  hof  (court)  of  the 
master.  In  primitive  prehistoric  times,  as  in  the 
time  of  Tacitus  and  afterward,  all  the  male  and 


188  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

female  household  menials,  peasants  and  workmen,  were 
scJialks. 

Manumissions  were  common,  but  depended  wholly 
on  the  will  of  the  master.  They  could  be  obtained 
in  various  ways — might  be  bought  with  labor,  prod- 
uce, money,  etc.  The  manumitted  did  not,  however, 
enter  at  once  into  full  enjoyment  of  the  rights  of 
freeman  or  master ;  indeed,  only  his  descendants  of 
the  third  generation  became  fully  purified  and  capa- 
ble of  entering  into  the  noble  class.  They  then  con- 
stituted, probably,  the  inferior  nobility  or  freemen, 
who  were  followers  and  companions  of  the  first  class ; 
and  perhaps  from  them  sprang  the  free  yeomanry, 
who  originally  possessed  but  small  property  and  a 
small  number  of  schalks  and  serfs. 

The  fighting-men,  or  warriors,  who  subdued  and 
enslaved  other  tribes,  or  transformed  into  schalks  the 
weaker  members  of  their  own  tribe,  frequently  located 
some  of  them  on  lands  or  homesteads  which  they  per- 
mitted them  to  cultivate  for  their  own  use,  on  con- 
dition of  paying  a  rent,  generally  in  kind,  and  per- 
forming various  other  acts  of  servitude.  Such  was 
the  origin  of  the  German  liti,  who  afterward  consti- 
tuted the  common  people. 

The  free,  that  is  originally  the  strong,  the  subduer, 
was  at  the  summit  of  the  whole  German  social  struc- 
ture. He  was  free  because  he  was  absolute  master 
over  tire  weak,  who  had  no  power  or  strength  in  him- 
self or  family,  and  therefore  was  rightless.  The 
genuine  meaning  of  the  word  frow  (from  which  is 


GEKMANS.  189 

derived  fri,  free,  freedom,)  is  "  the  right  to  own" 
land,  liti  and  schalks.  From  frow  comes  the  frowen 
"  freemen,"  "  rulers,"  "  masters," — the  caste  for  which 
all  others  existed.  Land  and  schalks  constituted  the 
wealth  of  &  frowen  or  nobleman,  and  to  acquire  them 
the  German  tribes  exerted  all  their  warlike  energies. 
All  the  remote  Teutonic  invasions,  as  well  as  those  of 
the  mediaeval  times,  were  made  principally  for  the 
acquisition  of  land  and  slaves.  The  lands  conquered 
by  the  swords  of  the  frowen,  were  worked  by  the 
schalks. 

The  slave  traffic  existed  and  was  highly  developed 
among  the  primitive  Germans.  It  was  carried  on  at 
the  time  of  Tacitus,  and  some  investigators  maintain 
that  for  long  centuries  it  was  the  only  traffic  known 
among  the  barbarous  Germans ;  and  slavery  in  its  worst 
form  was  in  full  blast  in  Germany  when  her*tribes 
dashed  themselves  against  the  Western  empire.  The 
slaves  constituted  more  than  half  of  the  whole  Ger- 
manic population.  "Wirth,  the  most  conscientious 
investigator  of  the  primitive  social  condition  of  the 
Germanic  race,  estimates  the  proportion  of  freemen 
to  slaves  as  one  to  twenty-four.  All  of  them— frowen, 
adelings,  nobles  of  all  degrees,  followers,  vassals,  liti 
and  schalks,  lived  the  same  simple,  agrestic  life.  Rude 
in  mind  and  of  vigorous  bodies,  in  comparatively 
small  numbers  they  shattered  in  pieces  the  rotting 
Roman  empire. 

First  the  incursions,  then  the  definite  invasions  and 
conquests — Attila's  forays  from  one  end  of  Europe  to 


190  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

the  other — gave  a  vigorous  impulse  to  slavery,  both 
abroad  and  at  home.  Abroad,  the  invaders  enslaved 
all  that  they  reached — destroying,  burning,  devastat- 
ing, impoverishing  the  population,  and  increasing  the 
number  of  those  forced  to  seek  in  chattelhood  a  rem- 
edy against  starvation.  At  home,  immense  tracts  of 
land  were  depopulated  and  abandoned,  and  old  and 
new  frowen,  masters,  seized  upon  them.  Of  course 
schalks  were  in  demand,  and  were  supplied  by  traffic 
and  kidnapping. 

The  wars  among  the  Germanic  tribes,  which  were 
continued  more  or  less  vigorously,  and  the  wars  with 
neighboring  populations,  increased  the  number  of 
slaves  thrown  upon  the  market. 

The  transition  of  a  great  part  of  Europe  from  the 
Roman  to  what  may  be  called  the  German  world,  wras 
so  terrible  that  for  several  centuries  the  most  unpar- 
alleled destruction,  desolation,  and  slavery  constituted 
the  principal  characteristics  of  the  first  mediseval 
epoch. 

But  Europe,  the  Christian  world,  and  humanity  were 
not  Jto  be  submerged  in  the  foul  mire  of  chattelism. 
The  awful  crisis  lasted  through  many  generations,  and 
bloodshed  and  superhuman  suffering  were  their  lot. 
But  finally,  the  turning-point  of  the  disease  was 
reached :  the  disorder  began  to  yield.  Often  after 
such  a  crisis  the  malignant  symptoms  do  not  abate  at 
once,  nay,  they  sometimes  reappear  with  renewed 
force,  and  a  long  period  is  needed  for  a  complete  re- 
covery. So  in  the  evolution  of  Europe,  overflowed  by 


GERMANS.  191 

the  German  tribes,  the  most  malignant  symptoms  of 
chattel  hood  continued  and  reappeared  for  a  long  time 
in  their  worst  characteristics,  before  the  social  body 
entered  the  stage  of  convalescence. 

The  bloody  throes  of  the  German  world  redounded 
to  the  benefit  of  the  nobles  abroad  and  at  home.  Liti 
and  schalks  increased,  and  land  rapidly  accumulated 
in  the  hands  of  the  few  during  the  first  centuries  of 
the  German  Christian  era.  Thus  Saxony  belonged  to 
twenty,  some  say  to  twelve  nobles,  who  kept  thereon 
half-free  vassals,  liti,  and  schalks. 

As  the  oligarchs  of  Greece  and  Rome  and  Gaul, 
so  the  German  frowen,  the  powerful,  the  rich,  in  all 
possible  ways,  per  fas  et  nefas,  seized  upon  the  home- 
steads of  the  poor  ;  and  the  impoverished  freemen  or 
ahrimen,  smaller  nobles,  and  vassals,  became  liti  and 
schalks.  Analogous  conditions  produce  analogous 
results  in  usages  as  in  institutions  and  laws ;  and 
often  that  which  appears  to  have  been  borrowed  by 
one  nation  or  people  from  another,  is  only  a  domestic 
outgrowth  germinating  from  similar  circumstances. 

"When  the  German  lay  and  clerical  founders  of 
the  feudal  system  possessed  more  land  than  they 
could  cultivate,  and  when  the  iron  hand  of  Charle- 
magne prevented  domestic  feuds  and  the  supply  of 
slaves  from  that  source,  then  they  kidnapped  right  and 
left,  heathen  and  Christian,  poor  freeman  or  schalk. 
Some  of  the  feudal  barons  of  the  time  of  Charlemagne 
owned  as  many  as  twenty  thousand  liti  and  schalks. 

Karl,  Karle  (the   correct  name),  or  Charlemagne 


192  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

(the  more  common  one),  in  one  of  his  numerous  edicts 
or  capitularies,  prescribes  as  follows  to  those  who  re- 
ceived lands,  baronies,  abbeys,  etc.,  as  fiefs  or  grants: 
"Et  qui  nostrum  habet  beneh'cium  diligentissime 
prevideat  quantum  potest  Deo  donante,  ut  nullus  ex 
mancipiis  (chattels)  ad  ilium  pertinentes  beneficium 
fame  moriatur,  quod  superest  ultra  illius  familise  ne- 
cessitatem,  hoc  libere  rendat  jure  prescripto." 

Manumissions  were  promoted,  in  various  ways,  by 
the  civil  and  clerical  authorities.  Many  free  yeomen 
were  created  from  manumitted  slaves,  as  well  as  from 
poor  vassals  or  followers.  But  such  were  soon  impov- 
erished by  wars  and  devastations,  and  were,  from 
various  causes,  reduced  to  the  condition  of  Uti  and 
chattels. 

Serfdom  and  slavery  were  generally  more  severe  in 
the  northern  portion  of  Germany,  as  Saxony,  etc., 
than  in  the  southern ;  but  in  both, the  peasantry  were 
crushed,  oppressed,  and,  when  it  was  feasible,  enslaved. 
When  Lothair  I.,  grandson  of  Charlemagne,  revolted 
against  his  father,  Louis  the  Pious,  he  appealed  for 
help  to  the  oppressed  peasantry,  tenants,  and  chattels. 

The  centuries  of  the  faustrecht — "right  of  the 
fist,"  that  is  of  the  sword,  of  brute  force — soon  suc- 
ceeding all  over  Germany  to  Charlemagne's  orderly 
rule,  the  strongholds  of  dynasts,  barons,  nobles  and 
robbers,  shot  out  everywhere  like  mushrooms;  and 
from  them  radiated  oppressions  and  exactions  of  every 
kind.  The  ancient  practice  of  ruining  the  poor  free- 
men and  tenants,  then  transforming  them  into  serfs, 


GERMANS.  193 

and  then  the  serfs  into  chattels,  went  on  as  of  old. 
In  proportion  as  the  forests  were  cleared,  however, 
the  baron  found  he  could  not  profitably  work  the 
extensive  estates  with  schalks  alone,  and  that  it  would 
be  more  economical  to  transform  these  chattels  into 
serfs,  tenants,  etc.,  and  establish  them  on  small  parcels 
of  his  property.  This  was  the  first  feeble  sign  of 
amelioration.  Villages  formed  in  this  way  by  dynasts, 
or  princes,  and  by  barons,  then  received  some  rudi- 
ments of  communal,  rural  organization. 

A  more  powerful  engine  of  emancipation,  however, 
were  the  cities.  In  the  course  of  the  tenth  century, 
dynasts,  princes  and  t  emperors  began  everywhere  to 
found  cities,  endowing  them  with  various  franchises 
and  privileges.  The  legitimate  flow  of  events,  the 
necessities  created  by  a  settled  organic  existence 
which  could  only  be  supplied  by  the  regular  move- 
ments of  industry  and  commerce,  together  with  the 
influence  of  Gaul,  and  above  all,  of  Italy,  stimulated 
the  German  rulers.  To  the  emperor  Henry  I.,  of  the 
house  of  Saxony,  belongs  the  glory  of  having  given 
the  first  impulse  to  commerce,  and  thus  the  first  blow 
to  chattelhood  and  serfdom. 

The  population  of  the  newly-founded  cities  con- 
sisted of  inferior  people  of  all  kinds — laborers,  oper- 
atives, small  traders,  poor  freemen,  and  persons  manu- 
mitted on  condition  of  residing  in  the  cities — the 
founders  of  the  cities  originally  peopling  them  with 
their  own  retainers  and  with  vagabonds  of  all  kinds. 
Of  course  no  nobles  even  of  the  lowest  kind  became 
9 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

burghers,  and  thus  the  first  municipal  patricians  were 
of  very  inferior  birth.  Thus  antagonism  to  barons 
and  feudal  nobles  generally  formed  the  very  corner- 
stone of  the  cities. 

Among  the  privileges  granted  to  the  first  cities  was 
that  a  serf,  schalk,  or,  in  a  word,  any  bondman,  seek- 
ing refuge  in  the  precincts  of  a  city,  became  free  if 
not  claimed  within  a  year.  This  respite  to.  the  fugi- 
tive soon  became  a  common  law  all  over  Germany, 
even  between  nobles  in  relation  to  their  fugitive  serfs ; 
and  the  hunter  of  a  fugitive  lost  caste  even  among 
the  free  masters— -freiherrn.  When  a  legal  prosecu- 
tion was  attempted,  every  difficulty,  legal  and  illegal, 
was  thrown  in  the  way  of  the  claimant — the  cities 
willingly  resorting  to  arms,  for  the  defence  of  their 
right  of  refuge. 

The  first  Crusades  emancipated  large  numbers  of  per- 
sons, as  the  taking  of  the  cross  was  the  sign  of  liberty 
for  serf  and  for  slave.  But  in  Germany  as  in  France, 
the  great  and  permanent  influence  of  the  Crusades  on 
emancipation  consisted  in  their  strengthening  the  cities 
and  impoverishing  the  nobles,  and  thus  producing  a  sal- 
utary change  in  internal  economic  relations. 

The  wars  of  the  Germans  with  their  neighbors,  and 
above  all  with  the  Slavonians,  Maghyars,  etc.,  in  the 
tenth  and  eleventh  centuries,  again  gave  vitality  to 
the  slave  traffic  ;  and  war  prisoners  and  captives,  not 
now  of  their  own  kindred,  but  of  foreign  birth,  were 
brought  to  the  markets  for  sale. 

Nevertheless,   chattelhood  was  slowly  dying  out, 


GERMANS.  195 

and  about  the  twelfth  century  but  few  traces  of  it 
remained :  prisoners  of  war  began  to  be  ransomed  or 
exchanged,  and  villeinage,  with  various  services  at- 
tached, altogether  superseded  domestic  slavery. 

The  villein  possessed  the  rights  of  family,  of  village, 
and  partially  of  communal  organization.  But  many  of 
the  galling  characteristics  of  chattelhood  were  trans- 
fused into  serfdom  and  villeinage.  The  nobles  became, 
if  possible,  more  insolent,  exacting  and  oppressive. 
But  the  villeins  and  peasants  began  to  feel  their 
power,  and  to  combine  and  act  in  common  in  the 
villages,  and  afterward  in  the  communes. 

Partial  insurrections  followed  each  other  in  various 
parts  of  Germany  ;  here  against  one  baron  or  master, 
there  against  another.  Every  insurrection,  even  if 
suppressed,  nevertheless  gave  an  impulse,  though 
sometimes  imperceptible,  to  amelioration  and  eman- 
cipation. Insurrections  of  the  down-trodden  and 
oppressed  classes  are  like  feverish  efforts  of  diseased 
physiology  to  resist  the  disorder,  to  throw  out  the 
virus,  and  restore  the  normal  condition  in  the  economy 
of  life.  The  whole  world  admires  the  glorious  insur- 
rection of  the  Swiss-German  peasantry  against  their 
insolent  masters.  Then  the  bondmen,  villeins,  etc., 
individually  or  in  small  bodies,  by  the  axe,  by  fire, 
and  in  every  possible  manner,  protested  their  impre- 
ecriptible  right  to  liberty.  So  also  did  the  celebrated 
Miinzer  when  the  reformation  dawned  over  Germany 
and  Europe.  He  firmly  believed  that  religious  reform, 
to  be  beneficial  to  the  poor,  must  go  hand  in  hand 


196  SLAVERY  IN   HISTORY. 

with  social  ameliorations.  The  most  notable  insurrec- 
tion, however,  was  the  great  uprising  of  the  German 
peasantry  in  the  sixteenth  century.  From  the  Yos- 
gese  mountains,  from  the  Alps  to  the  Baltic,  numer- 
ous isolated  forces  rose  in  arms,  each  inspired  by  the 
same  great  idea.  They  had  no  centres,  no  possibility 
of  a  combination  of  effort,  but  all  of  them  recognized 
the  same  covenant :  1.  The  gospel  to  be  preached  in 
truth,  but  not  in  the  interest  of  their  masters — nobles 
and  clergy.  2.  Not  to  pay  any  kind  of  tithes.  3. 
The  interest  or  rent  from  landed  property  to  be  re- 
duced to  five  per  cent.  4.  Forests  to  be  communal 
property.  5.  All  waters  free.  6.  Game  free.  7.  Serf- 
dom to  be  abolished.  8.  Election  of  communal  au- 
thorities by  the  respective  communes.  9.  Lands 
robbed  from  the  peasantry  to  be  restored  to  the  ori- 
ginal owners. 

This  great  war  of  the  peasants  was  terrible,  pitiless, 
bloody.  More  than  one  thousand  strongholds,  burghs, 
and  monasteries  were  destroyed ;  but  the  peasants 
were  finally  overpowered,  the  nobility  being  aided  by 
the  forces  of  the  empire.  Luther,  too,  thundered 
against  the  poor  peasants.*  But  not  in  vain  did  they 
shed  their  blood.  The  oppression  by  the  oldfrowen, 
strengthened  by  feudality,  was  finally  broken  at  the 
roots.  The  imperial  German  diet  declared  to  the 
nobles%  that  if  they  did  not  cease  their  cruelties,  at 
the  next  revolt  they  should  be  abandoned  to  their 
fate. 

*  See  "America  and  Europe,"  by  the  present  writer. 


GERMAN'S.  19T 

Serfdom  was  not  yet  abolished,  but  was  moderated 
in  various  ways.  The  direct  and  indirect  influence  of 
the  Reformation  on  the  condition  of  the  peasantry  has 
been  already  mentioned.  Mild  reforms  were  intro- 
duced in  the  dominions  of  various  German  sovereigns. 
Certain  liberties  were  granted  to  rural  communes,  and 
the  number  of  free  tenants  slowly  but  uninterruptedly 
increased.  The  conditions  of  villeinage  on  private 
estates  began  to  be  regulated  by  the  respective  govern- 
ments; and  absolute  serfdom  was  slowly  dyingout.  The 
prosperity  of  Germany  increased  proportionally  with 
the  emancipation,  though  but  partial,  of  rural  labor,  and 
the  freedom  of  the  soil.  On  an  average,  those  regions 
were  most  prosperous  which  contained  the  greatest 
number  of  emancipated  rural  communities,  or  where 
the  villeinage  was  reduced,  systematized,  and  made 
more  and  more  free  from  the  arbitrary  exactions  of 
the  master. 

The  peculiar  political  organization  of  Germany  pre- 
vented any  unity  of  action  in  the  extinction  of  rural 
servitude.  Many  of  its  features — some  relating  to 
the  person,  but  principally  to  the  soil — survived  even 
to  the  present  century  in  certain  parts  of  the  smaller 
German  states ;  and  in  Austria,  Bohemia  and  Hun- 
gary, there  is  still  room  for  infinite  improvement  in 
the  condition  of  the  peasantry.  But  the  mortal  dis- 
order exists  no  more  :  the  fundamental  rights  of  man 
are  recognized.  Governmental  maladministration, 
injustice,  oppressive  taxation,  exactions  by  officials 
and  landlords,  are  unhappily  common ;  but  all  these 


198  SLAVEKY   IN   HISTORY. 

are  in  flagrant  violation  of  established  laws.  And, 
bad  though  they  are,  they  cannot  for  a  moment  com- 
pare with  the  blighting  influences  of  chattel  slavery. 

For  long  centuries,  and  with  persistent  pertinacity, 
have  slavery  and  the  oppression  of  man  and  his  labor 
gnawed  at  the  German  vitals ;  and  centuries  must 
elapse  before  the  recovery  of  a  normal  condition. 
But  the  Germans  of  the  present  day — moralists,  states- 
men, savants  and  professional  men,  as  well  as  artisans, 
mechanics  and  agriculturists — are  unanimous  in  con- 
demning human  bondage,  whatever  may  be  the  race 
enslaved.  Few,  indeed,  are  there  of  the  great  Ger- 
man race  whose  minds  are  inaccessible  to  the  nobler 
promptings  of  freedom  and  humanity. 


LONGOBARDS:  ITALIANS.  199 

XYIL 
LONGOBABDS— ITALIANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Leges  Longobardorum,  Cantu,  Troya,  Karl  Hegel,  etc. 

THE  Western  Roman  empire  was  fatally  permeated 
throughout  with  chattel  slavery.  Domestic  usage  had 
made  its  German  invaders  also  familiar  with  the  art 
and  practice  of  enslaving:  their  conquest  of  Rome 
accordingly  but  added  strength  and  extension  to  the 
slave-edifice.  For  a  longer  or  shorter  period,  various 
German  tribes  ravaged  Italy.  The  domination  of  the 
Ostrogoths  lasted  for  about  sixty  years,  and  the  rule 
of  Theodoric  the  Great  is  recorded  as  among  the  best 
and  wisest  in  that  period  of  devastation  and  oppres- 
sion. Finally,  the  Longobards  founded  in  Italy  a  per- 
manent establishment.  At  the  first  onset,  the  Longo- 
bards reduced  all,  in  city  and  country,  to  bondage  : 
the  magnate,  the  rich,  the  slaveholder,  as  well  as  the 
workman,  the  poor,  the  serf  and  the  chattel,  consti- 
tuted their  booty,  and  as  such  were  divided  among 
the  victors. 

Some  historians  maintain  that  all  free  Romans,* 
rich  and  poor — a  few  favored  aristocratic  families 
excepted — were  deprived  of  the  rights  of  personal 

*  Romans  as  citizens  of  the  empire  and  not  of  the  city  of  Rome. 


200  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

liberty  and  property  by  the  Longobards ;  others,  how- 
ever, assert  that  the  free  population  was  only  made 
tributary,  but  otherwise  preserved  their  property, 
rights  and  laws.  The  conquerors  (as  hospites,  or  quar- 
tered soldiers)  generally  took  about  a  half  of  the 
houses,  lands  and  chattels  of  the  conquered,  and  fur- 
thermore compelled  the  primitive  owner  to  pay  them 
a  tribute  from  what  was  left.  In  Italy,  the  Longo- 
bards made  the  free  Romans,  rich  and  poor,  tributary 
to  the  extent  of  one-third  of  all  which  was  left  them 
from  actual  confiscation;  and  Paul  Diaconus — him- 
self a  Longobard — says : '  "  Itomani  tributarii  effici- 
untur"  The  artisans  and  traders,  and  indeed  all 
inhabitants  of  cities,  likewise  paid  tribute.  They 
could  not  move  from  one  place  to  another  without 
the  written  permission  of  their  Longobard  master; 
and  in  this  way  originated  the  system  of  passports 
for  bondmen,  which  is  still  maintained  in  our  Slave 
States.  Thus  the  Romans,  once  proud  and  free,  be- 
came but  half  free — a  something  between  the  positive 
freeman,  such  as  the  Longobard  alone  was,  and  the 
still  more  reduced  tributaries,  the  aldii  or  aldions^ 
and  the  serfs.  In  brief,  the  freemen,  rich  or  poor, 
were  made  inferior  in  rights  and  in  personal  liberty 
to  the  soldiers ;  the  non-free,  the  ancient  colons,  etc., 
were  pressed  a  degree  lower  in  servitude;  and  the 
condition  of  the  domestic  chattels  alone  remained 
unchanged. 

The  Longobards,  like  all  the  other  German  warriors, 
disliked  the  cities,  and  the  chiefs  and  nobles  erected 


LONGOBARDS:   ITALIANS.  201 

their  fastnesses  outside  of  them.  The  common  soldiers 
receiving  lands  in  different  quantities,  formed  the  free- 
holders, yeomen,  or  ahrimansy  and  were  bound  to  per- 
form military  duty.  Such  was  the  origin  of  the  feudal 
system,  which  sprang  up  on  the  ruins  of  the  Roman 
empire.  The  numerous  cities  of  Italy  had  no  longer 
any  political  rights  or  signification,  though  they  still 
preserved  some  remains  of  former  culture  and  civil- 
ization, and  even  faint  shadows  of  the  former  muni- 
cipal regime.  The  imperial  city  itself  was  not  overrun 
by  the  Longobards,  and  from  thence,  as  also  from  the 
other  cities  of  that  part  of  Italy  which  belonged  to  the 
Eastern  emperors,  some  faint  glimmerings  reached 
the  Longobard  region  and  tended  to  preserve  ancient 
municipal  traditions. 

The  influence  of  the  Italian  polity  and  culture  at 
length  began  to  humanize  the  Longobards.  Some  of 
their  laws  concerning  chattels  and  slaves  are  more 
humane  than  were  those  under  the  emperors — more 
humane  than  those  now  existing  in  our  Slave  States. 
For  example,  a  master  committing  adultery  with  the 
wife  of  his  chattel  lost  the  ownership  of  both  her  and 
her  husband,  and  had  no  further  power  over  them. 
Various  regulations  also  protected  the  serf  and  chat- 
tel against  a  cruel  master,  and  punishment  was  not 
arbitrary,  but  was  in  many  cases  regulated  by  law. 
Emancipations  were  encouraged  and  protected :  King 
Astolf  s  edict  even  proclaimed  that  it  was  meritorious 
to  change  a  chattel  into  a  freeman.  However,  during 
the  first  period  of  their  dominion,  the  Longobards, 
9* 


202  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

like  all  the  other  German  conquerors,  in  Spain,  Gaul, 
etc.,  and,  above  all,  the  feudal  dukes  and  nobles,  con- 
sidered the  blood  of  the  conquered  as  impure,  and 
therefore  far  inferior  to  their  own. 

Industry  and  commerce  gradually  began  to  acquire 
vitality,  and  the  chattels  began  slowly  to  disappear 
from  the  cities,  either  by- emancipation,  by  purchasing 
their  liberty,  or  by  being  established  as  aldii  or  serfs 
on  their  masters'  lands. 

The  slave-trade  was  now  confined  principally  to 
non-baptized  prisoners — whom  the  Christians  of  that 
epoch  regarded  as  the  progeny  of  the  evil  one.  Ma- 
homedans,  heathen,  Germans,  as  the  Anglo-Saxons 
and  others,  from  various  nations  and  tribes,  were  more 
numerous  in  the  slave  marts  than  were  those  born  on 
the  soil  of  Italy. 

Under  the  Longobards,  Italy  again  began  to  be  more 
commonly  cultivated  by  numerous  colons  with  very 
limited  rights,  but  still  in  better  condition  than  those 
of  the  preceding  epoch  ;  copyholders  and  freeholders 
also  began  to  increase,  as  has  been  already  mentioned. 
So  that  when  the  heavy  clouds  of  the  mediaeval  times 
began  to  break,  the  condition  of  Italy  was  slightly  im- 
proving ;  and  when  Karl,  or  Charlemagne,  put  an  end 
to  the  dominion  of  the  Longobards,  more  land  was 
under  culture,  and  the  free  though  tributary  popula- 
tion was  greater,  both  in  the  cities  and  the  country, 
than  on  their  first  invasion. 

The  rule  of  the  Franks,  which  succeeded  that  of 
the  Longobards,  did  not  impair  the  condition  of  the 


LONGOBARDS  I   ITALIANS.  203 

Italians.  ,  Peace  was  beneficial  to  labor,  labor  stim- 
ulated emancipation.  Thus  the  number  of  chattels 
was  more  and  more  reduced,  while  the  serfs,  adscripti 
glebw,  increased.  But  the  disorders  which  succeeded 
the  dismembering  of  the  empire  of  Charlemagne  again 
ruined  many  free  yeomen,  ahrimans,  and  others  own- 
ing small  homesteads,  and  obliged  them  to  submit  to 
the  oppression  of  the  mighty  nobles.  Many  of  the 
dispossessed  and  impoverished,  however,  sought  refuge 
in  the  cities,  where  industry  flourished  in  proportion 
with  the  freedom  of  the  workmen  and  operatives. 
Finally,  about  the  eleventh  century,  the  cities  began 
to  strike  for  their  independence.  This  was  the  time 
of  the  revival  of  the  communal  franchises  in  other  parts 
of  Europe  also  ;  but  the  first  spark  was  struck  in  Italy. 
Around  the  standard  raised  by  the  cities  crowded  the 
serfs,  rural  and  domestic  chattels,  and  all  other  kinds 
of  bondmen  and  oppressed.  This  was,  in  fact,  the  in- 
surrection of  these  against  the  landed  barons,  nobles, 
and  oligarchs.  All  runaways  found  refuge  and  pro- 
tection in  the  cities  ;  and  hence  arose  the  energy,  the 
strength,  and  the  democratic  rancor  of  the  cities 
against  the  nobility  and  their  strongholds. 

In  the  second  part  of  the  mediaeval  epoch, 
throughout  Italy  and  Western  Europe,  prisoners  of 
war  were  no  more  sold  as  slaves,  but  were  ransomed 
or  exchanged.  The  Moors  and  Arabs  (Mahomedans) 
were  the  sole  marketable  chattels. 

All  the  Italian  cities  extended  their  dominion,  ac- 
quired lands,  incorporated  baronies,  and  regulated  the 


204  SLAVERY  IN   HISTORY. 

relations  between  the  owners  of  the  soil  and  the 
tenants.  -  Domestic  slavery  was  altogether  extinct; 
the  cities  were  animated  by  free  labor  in  their  arts, 
industries  and  handicrafts,  and  on  the  estates,  the 
peasants,  serfs  and  bondmen,  adscripti  gleboe,  became 
vassals  obliged  to  follow  the  barons  or  the  cities  into 
war ;  they  became  free  tenants — first  paying  rent  for 
their  land  in  kind,  and  then  paying  in  money ;  and 
the  number  of  freeholders,  and  others  holding  home- 
steads, continually  increased.  Hunting  for  abscond- 
ed serfs  now  had  an  end.  The  cities  and  boroughs 
emancipated  all  the  villagers  and  serfs  around  them. 
In  the  course  of  the  twelfth  century,  personally  de- 
grading servitude  of  every  kind  almost  wholly  dis- 
appeared; and  the  relations  between  the  proprie- 
tor of  land  and  the  farmer  were  established  on  the 
basis  which,  with  more  or  less  modification,  prevails 
to  the  present  day. 

In  the  ancient  classical  world,  in  Greece  and  Rome, 
domestic  slavery  had  its  seat  in  'the  cities,  and  there- 
from expanded  over  the  land,  destroying  the  whole 
social  structure.  But  now,  the  first  shout  for  liberty 
came  from  the  Italian  cities ;  the  cities  first  emanci- 
pated the  laborers  within  their  own  walls,  and  then 
emancipated  the  rural  serf.  Cities  again  became  the 
centres  of  civilization ;  they  nursed  its  infancy,  tended 
its  first  footsteps  and  gave  it  the  free  air  of  heaven : 
tliey  trained  it  not  amid  clanking  chains  and  groaning 
chattels. 

Thus  does  history  annihilate  the  ignorant  fallacy 


LONGOBAKDS  :   ITALIANS.  205 

about  Saxons  and  Germans  being  the  godfathers  of 
social  or  political  freedom. 

]&any  evils  and  disorders  undoubtedly  remained 
and  even  yet  remain ;  but  the  sum  of  all  evils — prop- 
erty in  man  and  in  his  toil — was  utterly  destroyed. 
Then  came  the  brilliant  epoch  of  the  Italian  Lombard 
cities — the  culminating  glory  of  Italian  civilization 
— whose  coruscating  warmth  set  free  the  whole  of 
"Western  Europe. 


FRANKS:  FEENCH.  207 

XYIII. 
FRANKS— FRENCH. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Augustin  Thierry,  Henry  Martin,  Bonnemere,  etc. 

DOMESTIC  slavery,  aggravated  by  the  oppression  of 
the  poor,  the  devastations  of  war,  the  insatiable  ne- 
cessities of  the  imperial  treasury,  the  confiscations  of 
property  during  the  reigns  of  bad  emperors,  and  other 
causes,  ate  into  the  very  vitals  of  Roman  Gaul.  It 
has  been  already  shown  how  the  ancient  relations  of 
clansman  and  client  merged  successively  into  tribu- 
tary colons,  into  adscripti  glebce^  and  into  chattels. 
At  the  period  of  the  final  assault  of  the  northern 
races  on  the  Roman  empire,  in  Gaul,  as  everywhere 
else,  there  was  no  people  behind  the  imperial  legions 
except  rich  slaveholders  and  poor  degraded  freemen, 
serfs  and  chattels ;  and  the  legions,  too,  were  mostly 
recruited  from  among  vagabonds  and  barbarians. 
Long  before  this  time,  Stilicon,  in  order  to  raise  sol- 
diers for  his  army,  proclaimed  freedom  to  the  chattels 
who  should  join  his  standard ;  and  by  this  means  col- 
lected over  thirty  thousand  men ! 

During  the  integrity  of  the  empire,  branches  of 
the  tribe  of  Franks  dwelt  in  parts  of  northern  Gaul, 
either  as  colonists,  or  as  allies  who  recognized  in  the 
Roman  emperor  their  lord  paramount.  From  here 


208  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

they  dealt  their  conquering  blows ;  they  subdued  to 
their  rule  the  other  German  races  already  established 
in  Gaul,  and  laid  the  foundation  of  the  future  Carlo- 
vingian  empire,  and  finally  of  France. 

The  Franks  permitted  the  conquered  peoples  to  re- 
tain their  own  law,  which  was  the  Roman,  for  all  civil 
suits  between  Roman  and  Roman.  This  benefited 
only  the  freemen — of  whom  there  were  but  few — 
and  the  rich,  so  that  they  could  oppress  the  poor  and 
treat  them  as  they  did  under  the  empire ;  for  the 
Franks  did  not  interfere  in  any  of  their  internal  rela- 
tions, legal  or  illegal.  The  rich  and  cunning  Roman 
magnates  ingratiated  themselves  with  their  conquerors : 
they  became  ant/rustiones  or  commensals  of  the  kings, 
thus  acquiring  a  high  social  and  political  status  and 
influence ;  and  there  were  many  of  them  among  the 
powerful  and  influential  aristocracy  which  sprang  up 
under  the  Merovingians.  All  the  conquered  paid 
oppressive  tribute  ;  and  the  rich,  as  of  old,  used  every 
means  to  increase  their  estates,  serfs  and  chattels  from 
the  booty  and  exactions  made  by  the  Franks. 

But  although  the  rights  of  the  free  Romans  were 
thus  recognized  in  principle,  their  persons  and  prop- 
.  erty  were  by  no  means  regarded  as  sacred.  The 
Franks  divided  the  conquered  lands  among  them  in 
lots,  and  often  seized,  along  with  the  estate,  the  whole 
of  the  personal  property  of  a  rich  Roman  magnate. 

The  Merovingians  were  almost  continually  at  war 
among  themselves,  and  these  wars  were  most  ruinous 
to  the  cities  and  the  rich  free  Romans.  When  a  peace 


FRANKS  I     FRENCH.  209 

was  concluded,  these  Romans  constituted  the  hostages 
for  both  belligerent  parties ;  and  when  a  peace  was 
broken,  the  hostages  on  both  sides  were  treated  as 
prisoners  of  war;  they  became  chattels,  and  their 
property  was  confiscated. 

The  Roman  cities  became  the  property  of  the  kings 
and  chiefs,  the  lands  the  property  of  the  Prankish 
soldiery.  The  Franks  also  were  perpetually  at  war 
either  among  themselves  or  with  their  neighbors. 
Military  duty  was  a  condition  of  the  possession  of 
land,  so  that  Roman  and  other  slaves  and  bondmen 
cultivated  the  soil  and  worked  for  their  conquerors. 
.During  the  imperial  epoch,  the  opulent  Gallic  mag- 
nates and  senators  lived  in  magnificent  villas,  like  the 
Roman  nabobs  and  oligarchs  in  Italy,  Spain,  Africa, 
etc.  During  the  early  period  of  the  invasions,  an 
owner  would  often  fortify  his  villa  and  defend  it  with 
his  armed  household  and  chattels.  Such  villas,  chang- 
ing masters,  afterward,  in  many  instances,  became 
feudal  strongholds,  around  each  of  which  grew  a  vil- 
lage, which  in  the  course  of  time  became  a  borough, 
then  a  town,  and  finally  a  city.  In  this  way  the  Gallo- 
Roman  villas  gave  rise  to  the  French  name  village 
and  mile. 

In  general,  with  the  new  Frankish  conquest,  oppres- 
sion became  increasedly  grievous,  while  the  slave 
traffic,  especially  in  prisoners  of  war,  received  a  new 
impulse.  In  the  first  storm  the  Roman  fiscality  for  a 
moment  disappeared;  but  it  was  soon  restored,  and 
with  it  almost  the  whole  of  the  Roman  administra- 


210  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

tion.  The  Franks  revolted  against  taxation  when  one 
of  the  kings  tried  to  apply  it  to  them,  but  the  Roman 
populations  bore  its  whole  brunt.  Tribute,  taxes  and 
other  exactions  finally  became  so  oppressive  that  the 
poor  and  impoverished  sold  their  children  and  some- 
times even  themselves  into  slavery.  The  Jews  were 
the  common  mediators  and  factors  in  this  traffic,  as 
well  as  the  most  extensive  slave-traders  all  over  Eu- 
rope, both  then,  and  in  subsequent  times ;  and  a'con- 
siderable  part  of  the  hereditary  hatred  of  the  Euro- 
pean masses  toward  the  Jews  is  to  be  ascribed  to  this 
historic  fact. 

The  Frankish  kings  and  their  Frankish  subjects  had 
large  estates,  metairies,  worked  by  serfs  and  chattels. 
The  conquerors  hated  the  cities,  preferring  the  favor- 
ite old  German  life  in  the  country,  where  they  spent 
their  time  surrounded  by  their  followers.  The  lordly 
mansions,  the  sola  of  the  kings  and  the  powerful, 
were  erected  amidst  great  forests  in  the  style  of  en- 
campments ;  and  to  this  day  the  German  word  hof- 
lager,  "  court-camp,"  is  the  name  for  the  residence 
or  court  of  a  sovereign.  Political  power  and  pres- 
tige were  no  longer  derived  from  municipal  citizen- 
ship, but  from  the  possession  of  land ;  and  thus  origi- 
nated the  feudal  importance  of  the  country  and  the 
barons,  in  contradistinction  to  the  now  powerless  mu- 
nicipium.  In  the  Greek  and  Roman  world,  the  coun- 
try was  wholly  sacrificed,  politically  and  socially,  to 
the  city,  which,  in  turn,  acquired  more  and  more 
political  power  and  importance  in  proportion  as  do- 


FRANKS:  FRENCH.  211 

mestic  slavery  destroyed  the  primitive  yeomanry.  In 
the,,  early  stages  of  feudalism  scarcely  any  attention 
was  paid  to  the  cities  ;  they  are  principally  mentioned 
as  sources  whence  taxes  and  tributes  may  be  largely 
squeezed. 

In  the  Free  States  of  the  American  Union,  also,  in 
the  townships  and  villages,  the  significance  of  the 
country  has  reached  its  highest  and  noblest  develop- 
ment. Here  the  free  townships  and  villages  are  the 
fountains  of  healthy  political  life,  and  the  genuine 
source  of  all  civilizing  agencies. 

Under  the  Merovingians  and  Carlovingians,  the 
frequent  wars  and  oppressions  proved  destructive  not 
only  to  the  natives  but  also  to  the  conquerors  them* 
selves.  The- Franks  and  other  German  landholders, 
by  their  violent  and  disorderly  mode  of  life,  were 
soon  impoverished  and  became  the  prey  of  powerful 
neighbors  of  their  own  kindred.  The  savage  rigor 
of  the  law  regulating  composition  for  crimes  quickly 
drained  and  utterly  destroyed  the  patrimonies  of  the 
reckless  soldiery,  and  thus  rapidly  increased  the  num- 
ber of  landless  vagabonds,  who  were  neither  tenants 
nor  serfs,  but  became  chattels  to  men  of  their  own 
race,  once  their  companions  and  perhaps  even  their 
followers.  At  the  end  of  the  second  Salic  dynasty 
very  few  free  laborers  existed,  and  kidnapping,  es- 
pecially on  the  sea-coasts,  became  common. 

Charlemagne,  as  previously  mentioned,  tried  to 
regulate  and  alleviate  the  condition  of  the  bondmen 
and  chattels.  His  capitularies  forbade  the  selling 


212  SLAVEEY  IN   HISTORY. 

of  chattels  beyond  the  kingdom ;  and  whoever  vio- 
lated this  law  became  a  slave  himself.  Slaves  were 
to  be  sold  in  the  presence  of  the  count  or  the  bishop, 
or  their  lieutenants,  or  notables,  but  not  surreptitious- 
ly, or  from  one  person  to  another,  without  being  con  • 
trolled  by  the  authorities ;  and  heavy  fines  also  fol- 
lowed all  violations  of  this  law.  Notwithstanding  all 
this,  however,  ISTorman  and  Saracen  wars  and  inva- 
sions, together  with  Frankish  taxations  and  exactions, 
kept  the  country  in  the  same  state  of  desolation  as 
during  the  centuries  of  the  agonizing  empire.  Scarce- 
ly any  towns  existed,  and  the  few  large  cities  were 
scattered  at  enormous  distances  one  from  the  other. 
Fastnesses,  castles,  burghs  and  fortified  monasteries 
dotted  the  land  ;  even  they,  however,  being  separated 
from  each  other  by  great  forests  and  marshes.  The 
poor  and  oppressed  serfs  and  chattels  were  hunted  and 
kidnapped,  and  no  place  of  refuge  existed  for  them. 

"Under  Charlemagne,  public  order  and  protection 
to  the  free  tenants,  serfs  and  chattels,  existed  to  as 
high  a  degree  as  was  possible  at  that  epoch ;  but  with 
his  death  all  this  disappeared.  The  crisis  which  then 
occurred  and  which  ended  in  consolidating  the  feudal 
social  structure,  was  even  more  terrible  than  the 
epoch  of  invasions.  The  poor  classes  and  the  serfs 
and  chattels,  as  we  might  suppose,  suffered  most. 
The  tenth  century  marks  the  triumph  of  the  feudal 
regivne,  and  with  this  triumph  chattelhood  (mancip- 
ium)  disappears  from  the  laws  and  the  usage  of  the 
oppressive  masters.  The  chattels  now  became  hered- 


FRANKS:  FRENCH.  213 

itary  bondmen  or  serfs,  and  were  no  longer  objects  of 
sale  or  of  traffic.  They  could  not  be  separated  from 
their  families,  but  were  established  in  villages ;  and 
the  slave  traffic  was  carried  on  solely  in  Saracens  and 
other  heathen. 

In  all  other  respects  serfdom  preserved  almost  all 
the  most  revolting  features  of  ancient  domestic  sla- 
very. The  feudal  lord  employed  the  serfs  as  tillers 
of  his  soil,  and  the  harvests  they  raised  were  the  chief 
sources  of  his  income ;  while  they  likewise  formed  his 
followers  in  his  feuds  with  feudal  neighbors  or  with 
his  lords  paramount — the  counts,  dukes,  and  kings. 
The  feudal  lord  did  not  sell  his  serfs — as  the  churches, 
synods,  and  councils  all  united  in  condemning  the 
traffic  in  Christians. 

The  present  serf,  tiller,  and  laborer,  all  over  "Western 
Europe,  was  the  younger,  outlawed  member  of  the  hu- 
man family,  and  so  now  are  our  Southern  chattels. 

For  a  long  time  the  difference  between  serfdom  and 
ancient  chattelhood  was  discernible  only  with  great 
difficulty.  The  collar  worn  by  chattels  since  the  time 
of  Augustus  remained  on  the  necks  of  the  serfs  (and 
these,  too,  not  adscripti  glebce),  with  the  expression — 
"  1  BELONG,"  or  with  the  name  of  the  master  cut  there- 
on. This  was  the  custom  in  England  with  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  serfs  of  the  Athelstanes  and  the  Cedrics,  so  that 
the  ancestry  of  the  haughty  Anglo-Saxon  slaveholding 
American  barons  of  the  present  day  wore  collars  ! 

The  feudal  order  was  firmly  established.  Below  the 
social  hierarchy,  composed  of  free  fiefs,  and  estates 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

belonging  to  nobles,  churches,  and  monasteries  (all  of 
them  free  from  taxation  and  public  servitude),  descend 
another  social  grade,  whose  only  badges  were  humilia- 
tions, sufferings,  toils,  and  martyrdom.  Servitude  and 
serfdom  had  similar  gradations  among  the  peasantry 
and  workmen  bound  to  the  soil  of  their  feudal  master 
as  existed  among  the  barons,  nobles,  abbots,  etc.,  in 
their  various  relations  and  duties  of  vassalage. 

A  few  towns  and  boroughs  began  to  spring  up  from 
the  same  social  soil  whence  arose  those  of  Germany. 
But  the  immense  majority  of  the  nobles  and  owners  of 
cities  considered  their  inhabitants,  at  the  best,  as  but 
half  free,  as  tributaries  or  censitaires^  and  continually 
attempted  to  plunge  them  deeper  into  servitude  and 
villeinage.  The  remnants  of  the  independent  yeo- 
manry, free  tenantry,  copyholders,  etc.,  rapidly  dis- 
appeared. These  descendants  of  the  conquerors — of 
kindred  race,  too,  with  the  barons — accepted  servitude 
in  order  to  find  patronage  and  alleviation  from  further 
oppression,  or  else  sought  refuge  in  the  cities  and  towns, 
abandoning  their  homesteads,  which  were  seized  by 
the  feudal  baron  and  annexed  to  his  estate. 

All  along  the  twelve  or  fifteen  centuries  which  ex- 
tend from  the  decline  of  the  Greek  and  Roman  repub- 
lics and  the  first  days  of  the  empire  down  to  the 
consolidation  of  feudalism,  it  is  evident  that  similar 
causes  were  ever  in  operation,  depriving  the  poor  of 
their  property,  their  labor,  and  finally  of  their  liberty 
— a  result,  too,  brought  about  in  every  case  in  an 
identical  manner.  In  this,  as  in  many  other  things, 


FRANKS:  FRENCH.  215 

the  history  of  the  human  race  and  its  disorders  and 
woes  is  a  record  of  almost  continuous  analogies. 

The  smaller  feudal  masters,  afterward  called  hober- 
aux,  were  generally  the  most  cruel  and  inhuman  then, 
as  well  as  afterward,  during  the  long- protracted  centu- 
ries of  serfdom  of  the  French  peasantry.  Tyranny 
always  becomes  fiercer  and  more  maddened  in  propor- 
tion as  the  circle  of  its  power  and  action  is  diminished. 
Is  it  not  so  also  on  American  slave  plantations  ? 

It  has  been  already  mentioned,  that  the  kings  and 
the  more  powerful  feudal  vassals  began  to  erect  towns, 
and  thpt  these  towns  served  as  refuges  for  the  home- 
less, and  also  for  the  serfs.  The  lesser  nobles  and  the 
feudalized  clergy  often  upbraided  the  kings  for  thus 
depopulating  their  estates;  while  the  barons  who 
owned  the  cities  soon  exasperated  their  inhabitants  by 
their  exactions  and  cruelties. 

Such  were  the  prominent  domestic  and  economic 
features  of  the  times  of  feudalism  and  chivalry  in 
France,  as  over  the  whole  of  Europe.  It  is  for  other 
reasons  that,  in  the  minds  of  some,  a  halo  still  sur- 
rounds their  memory  and  their  name.  But,  pene- 
trating behind  that  halo,  what  a  horrid  spectacle  of 
tyranny,  oppression,  and  cruelty  meets. the  eye!  The 
sham  chivalry  of  our  Slave  States  has  not  even  the 
shadow  of  such  an  aureola  to  hide  its  hideousness. 
The  cruel  and  reckless  barons  sprang  from  a  reckless 
race,  in  an  age  of  darkness :  they  had  no  other  traditions 
from  the  past,  no  other  example  before  them.  But  the 
American  chivalry  and  knight-errants  of  slavery  spit 


216  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

on  all  the  noble  traditions  transmitted  by  their  sires. 
They  have  before  their  eyes  the  spectacle  of  freedom 
generating  prosperity  in  all  ages.  And  yet  with  all 
this  do  they  deliberately  turn  their  backs  upon  the 
light,  and  rush  heedlessly  toward  dark  barbarity. 

The  feudal  rights  of  the  barons  in  the  products  and 
earnings  of  the  tradesmen  and  workmen,  as  well  as  in 
the  person  and  labor  of  the  serfs,  together  with  their 
right  of  civil  and  criminal  jurisdiction,  were  all  the 
result  of  successive  usurpations. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  eleventh,  and  especially  in 
the  twelfth  century,  the  cities  and  towns  rose  against 
their  feudal  oppressors.  This  great  movement  was 
not  preconcerted,  nor  was  it  instigated  by  outside  con- 
spirators. The  cities,  goaded  by  exactions  and  op- 
pressions, rose  separately,  and  each  one  on  its  own  ac- 
count. The  impulse  came  from  man's  natural  aspira- 
tions for  freedom  and  justice,  and  his  hatred  of  tyranny. 
The  true  conspirators  were  the  nobles  who  oppressed 
the  cities.  Louis  VI.,  of  immortal  memory,  aided  the 
cities  in  their  efforts  to  form  themselves  into  com- 
munes, gave  them  charters,  and  relieved  them  from 
the  power  of  the  barons  ;  in  short,  he  did  every  thing 
possible  to  undermine  the  power  of  the  nobles,  and 
prevent  them  from  pillaging,  torturing,  and  murdering 
the  people.  But  the  emancipation  of  the  cities  was 
finally  achieved  only  by  blood  ;  and  the  kings,  moved 
by  humanity  as  well  as  policy,  supported  the  citizens 
in  their  efforts,  and  thus  reduced  the  tyrannic  and  un- 
ruly barons  and  nobles.  The  nobles,  small  and  great, 


FRANKS:  FRENCH.  217 

in  France  as  in  other  parts  of  Europe,  resisted  with 
arms  the  communal  emancipation.  They  proclaimed 
and  treated  as  rebels  and  suhverters  of  order  and 
society,  all  who  tried  to  reconquer  their  liberty,  as 
well  as  all  those  who  advocated  the  cause  of  the  op- 
pressed. Does  not  the  same  phenomenon  reappear  in 
our  own  time  and  country  ? 

With  the  emancipation  of  the  cities  and  the  forma- 
tion of  communes,  civilization  began  to  illumine  the 
horizon  of  France.  But  this  great  social  event  had  not 
such  a  direct  influence  on  the  condition  of  the  rural 
populations  in  France  as  it  had  in  Italy.  Still  the 
serfs  found  a  safe  refuge  in  the  now  independent  cities. 

The  crusades  acted  in  the  same  way  on  the  condi- 
tion of  the  peasantry  in  France,  as  they  did  in  Ger- 
many, Flanders,  etc. 

Successively,  kings  began  to  regulate  and  alleviate 
the  condition  <?f  the  serfs  on  their  domains,  gradually 
interposing  to  limit  the  power  of  the  nobles  over  their 
serfs.  A  chronicler  of  that  time  (twelfth  century), 
says :  "  Cetera  censuum  exactiones  quce  servis  infligi 
solent  (nobles)  omnimodis  vacent."  The  French  le- 
gists of  the  thirteenth  century,  inspired  by  Ulpian  and 
Horn  an  law,  the  study  of  which  was  again  revived 
by  a  decree  of  Louis  IX.,  declared  that  every  man  on 
the  soil  of  France  is  or  ought  to  be  free,  by  right  as 
well  as  by  the  law  of  nature.  Subsequently  this  axiom 
was  considered  applicable  even  to  Saracens,  Mahom- 
edans,  Africans,  and  all  races,  creeds,  and  nationalities. 
Louis  IX.  was  the  friend  of  the  oppressed  and  the  re- 
10 


218  SLAYERY  IN  HISTORY. 

dresser  of  the  wrongs  of  the  peasantry.  He  abolished 
the  more  oppressive  servitudes  in  the  domains,  and 
tried  to  humanize  the  nobles. 

The  great  principle  of  liberty  asserted  by  the  legists 
of  the  thirteenth  century,  was  in  the  fourteenth  em- 
bodied in  a  law  or  edict  of  Louis  X.,  which  decreed 
that  the  serfs  might  pay  off  their  personal  and  rural 
obligation  to  the  nobles  and  become  free  tenants. 
This  law  was  very  generally  carried  out  in  the  royal  do- 
mains, but  did  not  find  much  favor  among  the  nobles 
or  in  the  feudalized  church.  At  that  time,  moreover, 
many  serfs  and  peasants,  from  poverty,  mental  deg- 
radation, and  shiftlessness,  and  -others  from  distrust 
of  the  law  and  the  nobles,  refused  the  freedom  offered 
to  them.  In  several  provinces,  disorders  even  resulted 
from  their  resistance,  especially  in  those  places  where 
the  conditions  dictated  by  the  seneschals  (royal  over- 
seers), nobles,  and  priests,  were  so  oppressive  as  to 
make  free  tenantry  no  better  than  bondage ;  and  for 
this  reason,  also,  serfs  who  had  obtained  their  liberty 
often  returned  to  servitude.  In  defence  of  American 
chattelhood,  it  is  asserted  that  many  chattels  spurn  the 
idea  of  emancipation  ;  that  many  of  them,  when  eman- 
cipated, return,  of  their  own  choice,  into  slavery,  and 
that  they  are  too  degraded  to  appreciate  freedom,  and 
too  shiftless  to  achieve  its  rewards.  These  very  rea-  • 
sons,  based  on  facts  similar  to  those  now  set  forth, 
were  urged  by  the  French  feudal  masters  against  the 
efforts  of  the  government  to  liberate  the  oppressed 
whites. 


FKANKS  :  FRENCH.  219 

The  consequences  of  a  bodily  as  of  a  social  disorder 
are  frequently  of  protracted  duration.  The  oppression 
of  centuries  so  destroys  the  mind  and  manhood  of  the 
oppressed  that  they  consider  slavery  their  normal  con- 
dition, even  as  physical  monstrosities  have  sometimes 
been  regarded  by  their  possessors  as  the  symbols  of 
beauty  and  health.  Such  incurables  may  even  be 
found  among  the  now  free  descendants  of  social,  po- 
litical, national,  and  legal  bondmen — among  the  de- 
scendants of  those  who  in  former  times  were  covered 
with  contempt,  and  who  suifered  unutterable  social 
degradation.  Such  are  the  Irish,  en  masse,  and  some 
others  who  escape  oppression  in  Europe  only  to  sup- 
port slavery  in  America. 

Personal  serfdom  and  vassalage  began  to  be  gradu- 
ally modified ;  but  on  the  estates  of  the  clergy  and 
nobility  it  lasted  till  near  the  eighteenth  century,  still 
preserving  several  of  its  worst  features.  Nowhere  in 
Europe  was  the  peasant  so  long  and  so  grievously  op- 
pressed as  in  France ;  nowhere  did  he  take  such  ter- 
rible but  just  revenge.  Insurrections  of  the  peasantry 
in  various  parts  of  France  form  an  almost  uninter- 
rupted historic  series,  of  which  the  great  revolution 
was  the  fitting  climax. 

The  repeated  bagaudies  of  the  Gallic  peasantry 
have  been  already  mentioned :  the  next  revolt  was 
in  the  tenth  century,  when  the  serfs  and  peasants 
of  Nenstrse  (Normandy)  rose  against  the  Northmen, 
who  had  just  established  themselves,  and  who  tried 
to  transform  them  into  chattels;  and  another  rising 


220  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

took  place  about  the  same  time  in  Brittany.  Beside 
many  partial  uprisings  against  particular  strongholds 
or  districts,  the  most  general  and  most  celebrated 
were  those  of  the  pastouraux,  in  the  thirteenth  and 
fourteenth  centuries — one  of  which  was  directed  prin- 
cipally against  the  feudalized  clergy — and  the  repeat- 
ed jacqueries.  Indeed,  during  the  fourteenth  cen- 
tury, the  whole  of  Europe  might  be  said  to  be  di- 
vided into  two  great  hostile  camps :  the  nobles  with 
their  exactions  and  oppressions  forming  one,  and  the 
laborers,  peasants  and  serfs,  resisting  their  oppressors 
with  battle-axe  and  fire,  forming  the  other.  And  thus 
the  oppressed  everywhere  hewed  out  their  path  to 
freedom  and  civilization. 

The  fifteenth,  sixteenth  and  seventeenth  centuries 
had  their  various  revolts,  sometimes  evoked  by  gov- 
ernmental measures  and  maladministration,  but  far 
oftener  stirred  up  by  the  reckless  and  cruel  treatment 
of  the  laborer  by  the  nobles — against  whom  both  the 
law  and  royal  authority  were  too  often  inefficient  and 
powerless. 

Then  came  the  epoch  of  atonement  and  of  justice 
— 1789-1793.  Then  germinated  the  seeds  which  had 
been  sown  for  centuries  in  the  social  soil  by  the  op- 
pressors, and  then,  too,  was  gathered  the  bloody  har- 
vest. 

The  present  rural  population  or  peasantry  of  France, 
the  descendants  of  serfs  and  chattels,  now  possess' the 
eame  civil  and  political  rights  as  any  other  class  in 
the  nation — rights  more  ample  than  are  enjoyed  by 


FRANKS:  FRENCH.  221 

any  other  peasantry  in  Europe.  They  have,  of  course, 
still  to  suffer  various  evils  arising  from  the  common 
imperfection  of  all  social  structures;  but  no  special 
degradation  is  attached  to  their  birth  or  their  condi- 
tion. 

The  first  glimpses  of  mental  culture,  in  the  earliest 
mediaeval  night,  came  from  the  monasteries — from 
monks  who  generally  belonged  to  the  conquered  race, 
or  sprang  from  chattels  and  serfs.  Indeed,  almost  all 
the  modern  European  civilization  was  elaborated  in 
the  cities  by  the  so-called  middle  classes,  and  by 
peasants.  Luther  and  Kepler  were  the  sons  of  poor 
peasants;  and  the  sires  of  the  immense  majority  of 
the  European  middle  classes,  at  one  time  or  another, 
were  chattels,  serfs,  or  bondmen,  who  were  for  ages 
considered  and  treated  as  brutes  by  the  nobles  and 
barons.  All  over  Europe  many  of  the  genealogies 
of  aristocratic  families  ascend  to  slaves,  serfs  and 
villeins. 


BRITONS,   ANGLO-SAXONS,  ENGLISH.  223 


XIX. 
BEITONS,  ANGLO-SAXONS,  ENGLISH. 

AUTHORITIES  I 

Domesday-book,  Sharon  Tamer,  Lapperiberg,  Pauli,  Hallam,  Brougham, 
Vaughan,  etc. 

THE  social  condition  of  the  Britons  previous  to  the 
invasion  of  Caesar  was  in  all  probability,  similar  to  that 
of  their  kindred  Gauls.  They  lived  in  clans ;  the 
soil  was  held  by  a  tenure  similar  to  that  which  pre- 
vailed among  the  Gauls,  and  was  tilled  by  clansmen 
or  free  laborers.  Slavery  was  then,  if  possible,  even 
more  insignificant  among  the  Britons  than  among  the 
Gauls ;  and  the  slaves  consisted  of  criminals  and  pris- 
oners of  war,  and  were  the  common  property  of  the 
clan.  The  laboring  classes  were  not  impoverished, 
nor  were  they  dependent  upon  the  chiefs  as  in  Gaul 
at  the  time  of  the  Roman  conquest.  For  various 
reasons  Home's  influence  did  not  operate  so  fatally 
on  the  Britons  as  it  did  on  the  Gauls ;  neither  the 
culture  of  Rome  nor  her  disorganizing  and  oppres- 
sive administration  permeated  Britain  to  the  same 
extent  as  they  did  the  rest  of  the  empire.  Still  Ro- 
man rule  seems  to  have  altered  somewhat  the  primi- 
tive relations  between  the  chiefs  and  their  clansmen, 
impoverishing  the  latter  and  corrupting  the  former. 
The  Roman  rule  was  propitious  to  slavery;  it  sur- 


224  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

rounded  the  powerful  natives  with  dependents  and 
chattels,  while  the  poor  gradually  lost  their  freedom, 
and  began  to  cultivate  the  soil  less  for  their  own  sake 
than  on  account  of  their  chiefs.  The  dissolution  of 
former  social  relations  was  effected  and  the  impover- 
ishment of  the  people  fearfully  increased,  by  the  un- 
interrupted invasions  of  the  Picts  and  Scots,  and  by 
the  Anglo-Saxon  conquest. 

The  Anglo-Saxons,  spreading  over  the  land,  en- 
slaved its  former  owners,  selling  them  abroad  or 
making  them  work  for  the  conquerors  at  home.  The 
Anglo-Saxons  planted  on  the  soil  of  Britain  their 
German  mode  of  life  and  their  social  organism  in  all 
its  details.  They  brought  with  them  their  bondmen 
and  slaves,  their  laws  and  usages  relating  to  slavery, 
to  the  possession  of  the  soil,  and  to  composition  for 
crime  (all  of  which  have  been  explained  in  former 
pages).  Under  the  Anglo-Saxons  and  Danes,  the 
chattels  consisted  of  the  descendants  of  the  slaves 
existing  in  Roman  times,  as  well  as  natives  newly 
enslaved,  criminals,  debtors  and  captives  taken  in 
war.  The  Anglo-Saxon  families  also  had  slaves  of 
Scotch  and  Welsh  birth,  generally  from  the  borders ; 
while,  on  the  other  hand,  many  Anglo-Saxons  were 
kept  in  bondage  by  the  Scotch  and  Welsh.  Turner 
says :  "  It  is  well  known  that  a  large  proportion  of 
the  Anglo-Saxon  population  was  in  a  state  of  slavery ; 
they  were  conveyed  promiscuously  with  the  cattle." 

The  Anglo-Saxon  slaves  were  called  theow  esne  and 
wite-theows,  or  penal  slaves.  Their  condition  was  at- 


BKITONS,  ANGLO-SAXONS,   ENGLISH.  225 

tended  with  all  the  horrors  of  slavery.  They  were 
kept  in  chains,  were  whipped,  branded,  and  wore  col- 
lars. They  were  sold  in  the  markets,  especially  in 
London,  and  were  at  times  exported  beyond  the  sea, 
and  found  their  way  even  to  the  markets  of  Italy  and 
Rome.  Every  one  knows  that  it  was  the  exposition 
for  sale  of  Anglo-Saxon*  slaves  in  the  Roman  mar- 
ket wrhich  resulted  in  the  introduction  of  Christianity 
into  Britain.  Christianity  softened  the  savage  customs 
of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  and  greatly  promoted  emanci- 
pation ;  and  this  again  increased  the  number  of  free- 
men and  half-freemen,  which  formed  the  lower  class 
of  the  population. 

The  division  into  classes — castes  almost — was  very 
rigidly  observed  by  the  Anglo-Saxons.  The  powers 
and  rights  of  nobles,  and  of  those  who  reached  a  high 
position  as  royal  officials  or  owners  of  extensive  landed 
property,  were  very  great.  The  possession  of  land 
gave  a  higher  political  status^  and  conferred  greater 
power  among  the  Anglo-Saxons  than  among  any  of 
the  other  German  tribes  settled  throughout  Europe. 

The  free  yeornen,  or  owners  of  land  in  fee  simple, 
sought  protection  from  the  hlaford  or  mighty  lord. 
For  this  they  bartered  away,  partially,  both  their  free- 
dom and  their  right  to  the  land — as  was  customary 
also  among  the  German  and  all  other  ancient  nations. 
The  Anglo-Saxon  yeomen  were,  in  general,  in  a  sub- 
ordinate condition ;  they  had  no  law,  and  their  free- 
dom consisted  principally  in  having  the  right  to 
change  masters.  The  tradesmen  also  were,  for  the 
10* 


22t>  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

most  part,  in  a  servile  state,  and  were  manumitted  like 
other  chattels.  Some  of  the  manumitted  slaves  became 
agricultural  laborers  and  hired  land  from  the  clergy, 
the  great,  the  thanes  or  the  ealdormen,  paying  them  an 
annual  rent  in  produce  or  money  ;  but  many  of  them 
also  went  into  the  towns  and  became  burghers.  Some 
of  the  burghers,  also,  were  subject  to  barons  and  other 
lords,  as  the  king ;  indeed,  the  burghers  generally  wrere 
not  actual  freeholders,  and,  if  they  were  free,  often  had 
not  wholly  escaped  the  domestic  service  of  their  mas- 
ters. The  condition  of  the  immense  majority  of  An- 
glo-Saxons was  therefore  far  from  real  freedom. 

The  Norman  conquest  transformed  many  landlords 
into  tenants,  while  the  humbler  classes  passed  into  the 
hands  of  the  new  masters.  They  became  the  tenants 
and  laborers  of  the  Norman,  for  whom  otherwise  the 
conquered  land  would  have  been  worthless.  But  the 
Norman  conquest  rendered  Saxon  servitude  so  gall- 
ing, that  villeinage  was  nearly  equal  to  chattelhood. 

The  "  Domesday-book"  gives  25,000  as  the  number 
of  slaves  in  England.  The  great  bulk  of  the  rural 
population  was  composed  of  bondmen,  or  villeins  un- 
der various  designations — as  lordiers,  geburs,  cotsetlas, 
etc. — who  were  compelled  to  pay  oppressive  imposts, 
and  submit  to  various  degrading  and  oppressing  ser- 
vitudes. These  oppressions  and  exactions  bore  most 
heavily  on  the  Anglo-Saxon  population. 

Slaves  and  serfs  attached  to  the  soil  might  be  sold 
in  the  market-place,  at  the  pleasure  of  their  owners. 
Husbands  sold  their  wives,  and  parents,  unable  or  un- 


BRITONS,  ANGLO-SAXONS,  ENGLISH.  227 

willing  to  support  their  children,  might  dispose  of 
them  in  the  same  manner.  The  English  slave-dealer 
of  the  eleventh  and  twelfth  centuries,  sold  his  Anglo- 
Saxon  commodities  to  the  Irish.  A  law  enacted  in 
1102,  prohibited  this  "  wicked  trade;"  but  the  law  was 
eluded,  the  trade  continued,  and  when  Henry  II. 
invaded  Ireland,  he  found  English  slaves  there,  whom 
he  manumitted.  In  order  to  increase  the  revenue, 
as  also  from  other  motives  of  policy,  the  royal  power 
in  England,  as  all  over  Europe,  generally  favored  the 
oppressed ;  its  tendency  always  was  to  curb  the  arbi- 
trary exactions  of  the  barons,  to  promote  emancipa- 
tion, and  generally  to  aid  the  serfs.  William  the 
Conqueror  ordered  that  the  lords  should  not  deprive 
the  husbandmen  of  their  land  ;  he  enacted  regulations 
to  prevent  arbitrary  enslavement,  and  prohibited  the 
sale  of  slaves  out  of  the  country.  He  also  enacted  a 
law  which  provided  that  the  residence  of  any  serf  or 
slave  for  a  year  and  a  day,  without  being  claimed,  in 
any  city,  burgh,  walled  town  or  castle,  should  entitle 
him  to  perpetual  liberty. 

An  independent  freeholding  yeomanry  existed  in 
comparatively  small  numbers.  The  recklessness  of 
the  feudal  barons  obliged  the  yeomanry,  for  the  sake 
of  protection,  to  render  allegiance  to  the  manor,  and 
thus,  about  a  century  after  the  conquest,  almost  all 
the  small  homesteads  disappeared.  The  conquered 
population  held  their  property,  not  by  absolute  right, 
but  by  a  tenure  from  the  lord.  Thus  all  individual 
freedom,  except  that  of  the  nobles,  became  either  en- 


228  SLAVEKY  IN  HISTOEY. 

tirely  lost,  or  more  and  more  contracted,  till  finally 
time  and  circumstance  partly  loosened,  partly  de- 
stroyed, the  bonds  which  held  the  nation  in  slavery. 
In  England  as  in  the  whole  of  Europe,  feudal  oppres- 
sion was  the  growth  of  a  very  few  generations ;  but 
it  has  required  many  hundreds  of  years  to  destroy  it. 
A  disease  may  be  caught  in  an  hour — years  may  be 
required  for  its  cure.  For  the  conquered  race,  the 
Norman  had  all  the  contempt  common  to  conquerors. 
Macaulay  says  that  when  Henry  I.  married  an  Anglo- 
Saxon  of  princely  lineage,  many  of  the  barons  re- 
garded it  as  a  Virginia  planter  might  regard  mar- 
riage with  a  quadroon  girl.  But  personal  and  econom- 
ical interests  obliged  the  barons  to  relent  in  their 
treatment  of  their  serfs  and  chattels  ;  and  many  of 
them  were  allowed  under  certain  conditions  to  cul- 
tivate small  portions  of  land. 

The  Saxon  servile  class,  embraced  under  the  gen- 
eral name  of  villeins,  by  and  by  began  to  have  a 
permanent  and  legal  interest  in  the  land  they  cultiva- 
ted, tilling  it  under  the  condition  of  a  copyhold.  The 
number  of  tenants  on  the  manorial  lands  thus  rapidly 
increased.  But  for  a  long  period,  even  though  the 
law  declared  that  no  man  was  a  villein,  still  less  a 
chattel,  unless  a  master  claimed  him  (and  while  to  all 
others  he  was  a  freeman,  eligible  to  have  and  hold 
property),  still  the  nobles  often  seized  and  appropria- 
ted to  themselves  the  property  of  the  poorer  class. 

The  laws  under  the  Plantagenets,  although  in  some 
respects  hard  for  the  villeins,  indirectly  favored  their 


BRITONS,   ANGLO-SAXONS,  ENGLISH.  229 

emancipation,  and  threw  many  obstacles  in  the  way 
of  suits  brought  to  reclaim  fugitives. 

The  influence  of  the  cities  on  the  condition  of  the  serfs 
in  England  was  similar  to  that  which  they  exercised 
everywhere  else  in  Europe.  As  under  the  Anglo-Sax- 
ons, so  under  the  Normans,  the  inhabitants  of  the 
cities  were  originally  serfs  and  villeins,  or  their  de- 
scendants. The  Plantagenets  were  unceasingly  at 
war,  and  the  enlistment  of  soldiers  opened  up  an  av- 
enue to  emancipatiom ;  and  predial  and  feudal  servitude 
of  every  kind  ended  forever  with  the  performance 
of  military  service  on  land  or  sea.  So  also  the  serf 
or  villein  obtained  freedom  in  various  ways — through 
the  law  of  refuge  in  cities,  by  being  drafted  into  the 
royal  service,  and  finally  by  the  tenure  of  the  land 
on  which  the  baron  may  have  established  him  at  his 
own  baronial  pleasure.  Thus  by  degrees  arose  the 
right  of  copyhold  lands  ;  and  Edward  III.  prohibited 
the  lords  from  appropriating  such  lands  when  service 
was  rendered  or  the  rent  regularly  paid. 

Forced  servitude  steadily  diminished,  and  the  es- 
tate-holders complained  that  the  cities  and  towns 
absorbed  the  labor  necessary  for  agriculture.  In 
1345,  Parliament  regulated  the  wages  for  all  kinds  of 
farm-work,  and  made  labor  obligatory  when  paid  for 
in  money,  but  not  as  personal  servitude.  Gradually 
the  economic  and  social  relations  became  more  and 
more  those  of  employer  and  laborer,  and  less  and  less 
those  of  master  and  serf.  Still  the  nobles  and  estate- 
holders  continually  evaded  the  laws,  and  preserved, 


230  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

as  much  as  they  possibly  could,  their  oppressive  rights. 
Against  these  the  peasants  protested  by  various  petty 
insurrections. 

Wat  Tyler  and  his  peasant-followers  demanded  that 
the  existing  remnants  of  villeinage  shouMbe  abolished, 
and  that  the  land-rent  be  payable  in  money  and  not 
ia  personal  services,  and  also  that  the  trades  and  mar- 
ket-places be  free  from  vexatious  tolls  and  imposts. 
But  Wat  Tyler  fell — the  insurrection  was  suppressed 
— the  barons  and  lords  compelled  the  king  to  break 
the  promises  he  had  made,  and  the  "  shoeless  ribalds," 
as  the  nobles  called  the  insurgent  rustics,  were  forced 
back  to  their  former  condition .  But  in  a  little  over 
a  century  afterward,  villeinage  wholly  disappeared. 
Contumely,  oppression,  and  even  butchery  proved  in 
the  long  run  quite  powerless  against  the  efforts  of  the 
oppressed  classes  to  reconquer  their  freedom. 

The  wars  of  the  roses  dissolved  many  of  the  old  liens, 
destroyed  various  domestic  relations,  and  yet,  with  all 
their  devastations,  on  the  whole  rather  promoted  the 
emancipation  of  land  and  labor.  Richard  III.  made 
various  regulations  favorable  to  the  peasantry  and 
destructive  of  the  still  remaining  vestiges  of  servitude. 
On  this  account,  as  well  as  for  other  reasons,  some 
historians  defend  the  memory  of  Richard  III. ;  and  it 
really  seems  that  at  first  Richard  was  a  good  and  up- 
right man.  But  violent  passions,  lust  of  power,  ha- 
tred of  whoever  opposed  him  or  stood  in  his  way,  drove 
him  step  by  step  to  measures  of  violence  and  to 
murder;  and  so  he  stands  in  history,  a  hideous  and 


BRITONS,  ANGLO-SAXONS:  ENGLISH.         231 

accursed  monster  in  human  form,  reeking  in  the  blood 
of  his  victims.  Nations  and  parties  oi'ten  run  the  same 
career  of  violence  and  crime  as  individuals.  Let  the 
pro-slavery  faction  of  to-day,  which  already  begins  to 
move  in  the  bloody  tracks  of  Richard,  take  warning ! 

Under  the  Tudors  but  few  traces  of  the  former  vil- 
leinage are  to  be  found  ;  still  it  survived  until  the 
reigns  of  Mary  and  Elizabeth.  But  throughout  the 
whole  of  the  centuries  during  which  rural  servitude 
was  slowly  but  steadily  passing  away,  relics  of  a  very 
stringent  personal  servitude,  almost  equal  to  slavery, 
lingered  in  the  baronial  manors  and  castles,  in- the 
personal  relation  between  the  masters  and  their  re- 
tainers and  menials.  Against  these  remains  of  rural 
villeinage,  vassalage,  and  slavery,  the  Henries  and 
Elizabeths  exercised  their  royal  power,  and  issued 
decrees  bearing  on  the  subject  generally,  as  well  as 
others  relating  to  special  cases.* 

It  is  not  necessary  to  record  here — what  every  stu- 
dent in  history  knows — that  in  proportion  as  servitude 
began  to  decay,  the  prosperity  of  England  increased, 
and  that  from  its  final  abolition  in  every  form  dates 
the  uninterrupted  growth  in  wealth  and  power  of  the 
English  nation.  The  abolition,  of  rural  servitude  gave 
a  vigorous  impulse  to  agriculture,  and  secured  to  it 
its  present  high  social  significance  ;,  and  now  the  old 

*  Certain  pro-slavery  organs  and  small  yelpers  (see  "Southern 
Wealth,"  etc.,  New  York,  1860)  defame  the  memory  of  the  Henries 
and  Elizabeths  for  their  generous  action  toward  the  serfs,  forgetting  that 
such  royal  decrees,  in  many  cases,  liberated  their  own  direct  ancestors. 


232  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

nobility  all  over  Europe  are  proud  to  be  agriculturists. 
Agriculture  is  now  a  science,  and  it  is  by  freedom  that 
it  has  thus  reached  the  highest  honor  in  the  hierarchy 
of  knowledge  and  labor. 

Through  such  various  stages  passed  the  Anglo- 
Saxons  and  the  English  people,  in  their  transition 
from  chattelhood  and  various  forms  of  personal  servi- 
tude, to  freedom.  The  present  inhabitants  of  English 
towns,  as  well  as  the  free  yeomanry  and  tenants — in 
brief,  all  the  English  commercial,  trading,  farming 
and  working  classes — have  emerged  from  slavery, 
serfdom  or  servility.  In  the  course  of  centuries  the 
oppressed  have  achieved  the  liberty  of  their  persons 
and  labor,  and  the  freedom  of  the  soil :  they  have  con- 
quered political  status  and  political  rights  ;  and  their 
descendants  peopled  the  American  colonies,  and  here 
finally  conquered  the  paramount  right  of  national  in- 
dependence. The  genuine  freemen  of  the  great  West- 
ern Republic  are  not  ashamed  but  proud  of  such  a 
lineage  of  toil  and  victory.  These  freemen  now  and 
here  again  boldly  and  nobly  enter  the  lists  to  com- 
bat with  human  bondage  in  every  shape ;  and  thus 
they  remain  true  to  the  holy  traditions  which  they  have 
inherited  from  their  fathers. 


SLAVI,  SLAVONIANS,  SLAVES,   RUSSIANS.        233 


XX. 

SLAVI    SLAVONIANS,  SLAVES,  BUS- 

SIANS. 

AUTHORITIES : 

Schqffarick,    Cm-pus  Scriptorum  Historice   Byzantince,  Nestor,  Fischer, 
Karamzin,  Gerettzoff  etc. 

AT  what  epoch  the  Slavic  race  left  the  common 
home  of  the  Aryas  and  immigrated  into  Europe,  will 
forever  remain  an  insoluble  mystery.  Some  ethnolo- 
gists suppose  the  Slavi  to  have  preceded  the  Gauls, 
and  think  they  find  their  traces  all  over  .central 
Europe,  on  the  Po,  and  around  the  Adriatic  Gulf.  At 
all  events,  the  Slavi  are  very  ancient  occupants  of 
European  soil,  and  without  doubt  took  possession  of 
it  long  before  the  Germans.  The  region  between  the 
Danube,  the  Vistula  and  the  Volga,  was  from  time 
immemorial,  as  it  still  is,  distinctly  a  Slavic  region, 
although  at  some  previous  time,  it  was  probably  oc- 
cupied by  the  Yellow  or  Finnic  races.  Subsequently 
the  Slavi  covered  the  lands  between  the  Vistula  and 
the  Elba  (now  again  lost),  and  colonized  the  southern 
shores  of  the  Danube. 

From  immemorial  time,  the  Slavi  were  an  agricul- 
tural people;  and  perhaps  they  were  the  first  who 
cultivated  the  virgin  soil  of  Central  and  Northern 
Europe.  The  Slavi  lived  in  villages,  and  were  or- 


234  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

ganized  in  rural  communes,  electing  their  chiefs, 
(joupan)  or  ancients  (starschina).  As  early  as  the 
time  of  Herodotus,  the  commerce  in  grain  was  very 
active  at  the  mouth  of  the  Dnieper,  and  then,  as  at  the 
present  day,  the  Slavi  imported  their  wheat  to  Byzan- 
tium (Constantinople),  Greece,  and  Asia  Minor. 

The  region  occupied  by  the  Slavi,  from  the  Yolga, 
along  the  Don  (or  Tanais)  and  the  Danube,  was  the 
highway  of  the  various  branches  of  the  Mongolian, 
Finnic,  Uralian,  Scythic,  or  Turanian  family,  in 
their  invasions.  All  these  old  and  classic  denomina- 
tions for  the  inhabitants  of  Asia,  north  of  Baktria 
and  the  Himalayan  mountains,  are  now  merged  in 
that  of  Tartars.  So,  in  remote  antiquity,  Tartar 
Scythians,  mixed  with  Slavi,  dwelt  on  the  Tanais, 
north  of  the  Danube,  and  very  likely  on  the  plains 
east  of  the  Dnieper.  Other  invasions  of  Asiatic  Tar- 
tars, as  Huns,  Avars,  Bulgars,  Maghyars,  Petschene- 
gues,  Polovtzy,  Ugri,  Turks  and  Tartars  proper — 
doubtless  early  .familiarized  the  primitive  agricultural 
Slavi  with  the  horrors  of  war,  oppression  and  enslave- 
ment. And  among  the  slaves  which,  under  the  name 
of  Scythians,  the  Phenicians  and  Greeks  trafficked 
in,  there  were  doubtless  some  of  Slavic  origin. 

It  was  very  late  when  the  Slavic  race  began  to  take 
part  in  the  European  or  Western  movement.  Neither  in 
the  remotest  times,  nor  in  the  great  Western  impulse 
during  the  early  part  of  the  Christian  era,  do  the 
Slavi  appear  as  invaders  or  conquerors  on  their  own 
account.  For  many  centuries,  the  Slavi  in  their  rela- 


SLAVI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,   EUSSIANS.        235 

tions  with  other  races  and  nations,  must  rather  be 
considered  a  passivg  or  recipient  than  an  expanding 
or  creative  race.  For  these  reasons  slavery  does  not 
seem  to  have  been  indigenous  in  those  parts  of  the 
Slavic  family  which  constituted  independent  groups, 
at  the  time  when  the  race  first  dawns  upon  the 
horizon  of  history. 

The  Emperor  Mauritius,  in  the  sixth  century,  in 
giving  an  account  of  the  defensive  warfare  of  the 
Slavi,  says  that  when  they  made  prisoners  in  war,  they 
kept  them  as  such  for  a  year,  and  afterward  left  it  to 
their  own  choice  either  to  settle  among  them  or  return 
to  their  native  country.  Thus,  at  an  epoch  when  per- 
petual war  raged  all  over  the  world,  when  from  time 
immemorial  prisoners  of  war  everywhere  formed  the 
bulk  of  the  slaves  for  domestic  labor  and  for  traffic, 
the  Slavi  alone  were  humane  toward  their  captives. 

The  Slavi,  however,  became  diseased  by  slavery, 
partly  from  external  infection — partly  from  the  inter- 
nal development  of  events  similar  in  character  to 
those  pointed  out  in  other  nations  as  the  origin  of 
slavery ;  and  having  once  taken  hold  of  the  nation,  it 
worked  in  a  similar  way  as  in  other  lands.  For  here 
again  we  see  the  ever  recurring  analogy  between  the 
origin,  nature,  and  workings  of  social  and  bodily  dis- 
eases— the  same  everywhere,  under  the  equator  as 
around  the  pole. 

In  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centuries,  the  Germans, 
under  the  Saxon  emperors,  carried  on  a  war  of  con- 
quest, almost  of  extermination,  against  the  Slavi, 


236  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

from  the  Baltic  along  the  Elbe  to  the  Styrian  and 
Carinthian  Alps.  The  number  of  war-prisoners  and 
peaceful  settlers  carried  away  and  enslaved  was  im- 
mense. Many  of  them  were  sold  in  the  Baltic  ports, 
others  in  Venice,  others  again  were  distributed  in 
the  interior  of  Germany,  and  in  such  vast  numbers 
that  from  them  arose  the  general  designation  of 
"  slaves"  to  all  chattels  of  whatever  race ;  and  such 
was  the  origin  of  the  word,  which  was  afterward  in- 
corporated into  alt  the  languages  of  Europe.*  Subse- 
quently the  harshest  feudal  tenures  regulated  the  con- 
dition of  the  rural  population  of  Bohemia,  Moravia 
and  Hungary,  which  did  not  terminate  till  the  events 
of  184:8-'4:9  put  a  final  end  to  villeinage  (robot)  in  all 
these  countries. 

The  Poles  and  Russians  were  unaffected  by  feudal- 
ism in  any  of  its  social  or  constructive  developments. 
Up  to  the  seventh  and  eighth  centuries,  the  Poles  con- 
tinued to  elect  their  chiefs  from  all  classes  of  the  peo- 
ple— merchants  and  workmen.  The  prince  or  chief 
Leschko  was  a  merchant ;  while  Piast  was  a  wheel- 
wright, and  became  the  founder  of  a  long  line  of  kings. 
But  wars  created  the  men  of  the  sword,  or  nobility ; 
and  then  in  Poland,  as  everywhere  else,  the  nobles 
began  to  encroach  upon  the  rights  and  property  of 
the  weak,  and  to  oppress  the  agriculturists,  the  free 

*  The  name  of  slave  in  the  Slavi  language,  is  'derived  either  from 
slava,  "  renown,"  or  from  slowo,  "  the  verb."  It  is  supposed  that  the 
Slavi  called  themselves  thus  as  having  the  gift  of  speech,  of  the  verb,  iu 
contradistinction  to  those  speaking  an  unintelligible  language,  whom 
they  called  niemy,  "  mute,"  wherefrom  nemets,  "a-German." 


SLA VI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,   RUSSIANS.        237 

yeomen  (kmets,  kmetones),  and  the  husbandmen  (gos- 
podarsch] ;  but  neither  of  these  were  ever  transformed 
into  chattels.  When  the  Poles  became  a  distinct  his- 
torical nation,  chattelhood  was  disappearing  from 
Europe.  Their  contests  were  principally  with  other 
Slavic  nations  and  with  the  Germans ;  and  no  traces 
are  to  be  found  of  the  enslavement  of  prisoners  of 
war.  Their  heathen  neighbors  were  the  Prussians, 
the  ladzwingi,  and  Lithuanians ;  and  captives  made 
among  them  were  used  either  in  public  labors  or 
strictly  in  domestic  service,  as  were  also  prisoners  of 
war  in  after-times  made  from  the  Tartars  and  Turks. 
When  these  prisoners  became  Christians,  their  chat- 
telhood was  at  an  end. 

The  name  for  a  war-prisoner  is  niewolnik,  "one 
deprived  of  the  exercise  of  his  will."  When  the 
Polish  agriculturists  were  subjugated  by  the  nobles, 
and  their  condition  became  that  of  villeins,  or  ad- 
scripti  glebce,  they  began  to  be  called  'kJwlop  (a  name 
most  likely  borrowed  from  the  Russian),  also  poddany, 
"subject;"  and  the  rural  relations  had  the  general 
name  of  poddanstwo,  "  subjection." 

The  Biblical  narrative  of  the  curse  of  Noah  upon 
Ham  furnished  an  easy  justification  for  reducing  the 
people  to  bondage.  Peasant  (kholop)  and  Ham  became 
synonymous  in  the  mouths  of  the  nobles  and  the 
clergy,  who  generally  sprang  from  the  nobility.  The 
oppression  of  the  nobles  was  absolute  during  the  do- 
mestic wars  of  the  twelfth  and  thirteenth  centuries. 
The  people  resisted,  but  after  various  partial  but 


238  SLAVERY   IN  HISTORY. 

bloody  struggles,  the  peasantry  were  subjected.  In 
the  royal  domains  the  old  yeomen  (kmetones)  still  pre- 
served their  lands  and  some  of  their  rights,  and  to 
the  last  days  of  Poland,  the  peasantry  of  the  domains 
never  became,  either  legally  or  in  fact,  adscripti  glebce. 
Casimir  the  Great,  a  Polish  king  of  the  middle  of  the 
fourteenth  century,  protected  the  rights  of  the  peas- 
antry against  the  oppressions  of  the  nobles,  and  ad- 
vised the  peasants  to  defend  themselves  with  flint  and 
steel.  He  won  the  name  of  "king  of  the  poor  op- 
pressed peasants  "  (Jcrol  Idilopkow] :  perhaps  it  was  the 
gratitude  of  the  oppressed  which  conferred  this  title 
upon  him,  or  perhaps  it  may  have  been  a  sneering  epi- 
thet applied  by  the  nobles.  Goading  indeed  was  the 
oppression  of  the  nobles,  and  crushing  in  the  extreme 
the  servitude  of  the  peasantry  ;  but  it  never  reached 
the  point  of  chattelhood,  excepting  in  rare  cases  of 
absolute  lawlessness. 

The  Jcmetones,  or  free  yeomen,  and  the  husbandmen 
still  generally  remained  in  possession  of  the  lands 
which  were  once  their  immediate  property,  but  now 
only  as  possessors  at  the  pleasure  of  the  master — pay- 
ing him  a  rent  or  tribute,  in  kind  or  labor,  and  de- 
prived of  the  right  of  changing  their  domicile.  The 
master  could,  at  pleasure,  elevate  the  tenant  to  a 
freeholder,  or  emancipate  any  of  his  household  ser- 
vants. The  cities  did  not  furnish  such  a  sure  refugo 
for  runaways  as  did  the  cities  in  other  parts  of  Eu- 
rope. Military  service,  here  as  elsewhere,  gave  per- 
petual liberty  to  the  bondman. 


SLAVI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,   RUSSIANS.        239 

The  Polish  nobility  had  supreme  sway,  and  were 
all  in  all;  they  constituted  the  nation,  the  legislators 
and  the  sovereign — even  the  kings  being  controlled 
by  the  nobles  and  their  interests.  The  nobles  have 
paid  dearly  for  their  tyranny  and  oppression,  as  they 
themselves  now  admit  that  serfdom  was  the  principal 
cause  of  the  downfall  of  Poland. 

After  the  dismemberment  of  Poland,  Friederich 
"Wilhelm  III.  restored  personal  liberty  to  the  peasantry 
in  the  parts  of  the  kingdom  which  were  allotted  to 
Prussia ;  in  the  Austrian  portion,  the  condition  of  the 
peasantry  was  ameliorated  and  their  personal  liberty 
partially  restored  by  Joseph  II. ;  while  that  part  of 
Poland  which,  at  the  end  of  the  eighteenth  century, 
was  annexed,  or  rather  reannexed,  to  Russia — as  Lith- 
uania and  the  Russian  provinces — came  under  the 
control  of  the  regulations  prevailing  in  the  empire. 
In  Poland  proper,  all  the  peasantry  are  now  free  and 
enjoy  full  civil  rights ;  and  even  the  soil  tilled  by  the 
peasants  will  soon  be  fully  freed  from  every  kind  of 
predial  servitude  attached  to  its  possession  :  and  thus 
the  peasantry  will  recover  at  least  a  part  of  the  prop- 
erty taken  from  them  by  violence  or  subterfuge  long 
centuries  ago. 

The  Slavonians  in  what  is  now  called  Russia  proper 
— from  Lake  Peypus  and  the  Waldai  Heights  down  to 
the  banks  of  the  Dnieper — lived,  from  time  immemo- 
rial, in  villages ;  these,  again,  were  formed  into  smaller 
or  larger  districts  (obschtschestwo,  wolost),  which  elect- 
ed for  themselves  their  chiefs  or  heads  (golowd). 


240  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

Among  the  few  cities  in  Russia,  the  great  republi- 
can and  commercial  emporiums  of  Novgorod  and 
PskofF — well  known  and  flourishing  at  the  dawn  of  the 
mediaeval  epoch — formed  the  centres  of  that  Slavic 
region.  No  nobility  existed  then,  no  slaves,  and  no 
bondmen.  In  862  the  republicans  of  Novgorod,  dis- 
tracted by  domestic  feuds  and  party  dissensions,  in- 
vited a  Scandinavian,  Nordman,  or  Yariaegue  leader, 
called  Rurick,  to  take  upon  himself  the  government 
of  their  republic.  Rurick  and  his  followers  extended 
the  Yarisegue  supremacy  as  far  as  the  southern  region 
of  the  Dnieper,  and  Kieff  became  the  capital  of  the 
Russian  empire.  At  the  commencement  of  this  Ya- 
riaegue  rule,  no  positive  change  was  introduced  into 
the  internal  organism  of  society,  or  the  condition  of 
the  population.  Rurick  and  his  descendants  were 
elected  or  confirmed  by  the  Slavonic  people,  and 
he  governed  the  cities  and  districts  through  his 
companions-in-arms  or  lieutenants.  These,  together 
with  the  direct  descendants  of  Rurick,  under  the 
various  designations  of  princes  (kniaz  and  mouja), 
vassals,  and  warriors,  were  the  founders  of  the  Russian 
nobility.  This,  however,  could  not  be  called  feudal- 
ism, as  these  functionaries  corresponded  somewhat 
with  the  counts  and  missi  dominici,  or  lieutenant- 
deputies  of  Charlemagne.  The  grand-princes  or  grand- 
dukes  of  Kieff  made  war  upon  various  tribes,  mostly 
those  of  Mongolian  or  Tartar  origin,  and  swept  south 
of  the  Dnieper  along  the  shores  of  the  Black  Sea  down 
to  the  Caucasus  ;  they  repeatedly  invaded  the  Byzan- 


SLAVI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,   RUSSIANS.        241 

tine  empire,  sometimes  reaching  even  the  suburbs  of 
Constantinople.  Then  the  war-prisoners  and  captives 
became  domestic  chattels,  and  chattels  were  also  pur- 
chased from  neighboring  tribes  and  imported  into 
Russia. 

The  name  for  a  chattel,  of  whatever  origin,  is  rob, 
raba,  probably  derived  from  rabota,  "labor.".  Such 
robs  were  employed  in  various  kinds  of  labor,  but 
principally  in  clearing  the  forests  and  cultivating  the 
soil  for  their  masters.  Through  contact  with  the  By- 
zantine empire  Christianity  came  into  Russia,  besides 
various  other  usages. 

At  this  epoch,  a  new  form  of  servitude  appeared 
among  the  Russians ;  perhaps  it  was  borrowed  from 
the  old  society  and  civilization,  or  perhaps  it  originated 
from  a  new  concatenation  of  circumstances :  it  was 
servitude  by  mutual  agreement  or  Tcdbala,  by  which 
one  man  gave  up  his  person,  labor,  and  liberty  to  an- 
other. This  kind  of  bondman  was  called  Jcholop.  His 
servitude  was  usually  contracted  for  a  limited  time, 
though  sometimes  for  life ;  but  was  never  inherited. 
Debts  could  be  paid  by  the  Jcabala  writ. 

The  poor  freeman  could  become  a  kholop  by  his  own 
choice,  or  he  could  give  up  his  children  as  kholops,  as 
was  then  the  custom  among  all  nations,  heathen  and 
Christian.  Such  Icdbala-lcholop^  or  servile  person,  could 
not  be  sold  or  disposed  of  in  any  way,  as  his  servitude 
was  limited  in  duration  by  specified  time  or  by  his 
death.  Sometimes  freemen  choose  servitude  in  order 
to  escape  worse  conditions.  Early  in  the  domestic 
11 


24:2  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

economy  of  the  nation,  free  tenants  are  found  who 
hired  lands  for  a  year  or  more,  paying  the  rent  (obrog) 
in  money,  or  binding  themselves  to  cultivate  half  of 
the  land  for  the  proprietor  and  half  for  themselves.  A 
subsequent  law  prohibited  any  such  free  tenants  from 
contracting  any  work  or  Tcabala  servitude  with  the 
landowners.  The  contracts  of  free  tenants  were  obli- 
gatory for  a  year  from  St.  George's  day  (April  IT) ;  but 
otherwise  they  could  change  their  domicile  or  land  at 
pleasure.  The  laws  of  the  tenth  and  eleventh  centu- 
ries stringently  prohibit  the  infliction  of  any  kind  of 
corporal  punishment  on  such  free  tenants.  In  short, 
these  tenants  had  full  civil  liberty  and  full  civil 
rights ;  they  could  own  lands,  and  could  become  mem- 
bers of  any  rural  or  urbane  community,  practice  any 
handicraft,  etc. 

Probably  it  was  the  nobles,  the  rich,  the  higher  offi- 
cials, who  first  established  chattels  (robs)  on  their  lands 
as  tillers.  From  these  originated,  beside  the  rob,  the 
Icrepostnoi  Jeholop,  "  a  serf  strengthened  or  chained  to 
his  master,"  IcrepoTc  signifying  "strong,"  "strength- 
ened," "  attached  by  force" — Jcrepost,  "  stronghold," 
etc.  According  to  the  laws  collected  or  enacted  by 
Vladimir  and  Yaroslaw  in  the  tenth  and  eleventh  cen- 
turies, rob  and  Icrepostnoi  kholop  were  the  descendants 
of  prisoners  of  war,  or  of  those  who  were  bought  as 
slaves  and  imported  as  such  into  Russia,  and  also  the 
descendants  of  those  who  unconditionally  married  a 
slave  woman ;  while  the  public,  grand-ducal  slaves  or 
robs  were  condemned  criminals. 


SLAVI,    SLAVONIANS,    SLAVES,   KUSSIANS.         243 

Free  tenants  on  the  lands  of  the  nobles,  individual 
freeholders  (odnodwortsy),  etc.,  and  the  numerous  rural 
communities  owning  land  unconditionally  and  paying 
therefrom  tribute — rather  as  public  taxation — to  the 
ducal  treasury,  constituted  the  rural  population  of 
Russia.  From  the  time  of  Yaroslaw  to  the  end  of  the 
sixteenth  century,  not  one-tenth  of  the  population  was 
in  the  condition  of  rob,  krepostnoi  kholop,  or  serfs  by 
writ  or  kabala. 

The  almost  boundless  extent  of  land  constituting 
Russia  was  as  yet  unsurveyed,  and  no  regular  limits 
divided  or  marked  the  landed  property.  Thus  it  was 
easy  for  the  strong  to  encroach  on  the  lands  of  the 
rural  communes,  or  on  the  new  clearings  made  by  in- 
dividual freemen ;  and  such  annexations  were  often 
practised  during  the  domestic  wars  between  the  nu- 
merous dukes,  and  during  the  time  of  Tartar  domina- 
tion. Iwan  the  Great  (1462-1503)  ordered,  that  who- 
ever held  a  piece  of  land  in  undisputed  possession  for 
three  years  became  its  legal  owner.  But  even  the  en- 
croachments of  the  nobles  did  not  transform  the  free 
laborers  or  tenants  into  serfs ;  and  when  a  landlord 
was  oppressive,  whole  villages  abandoned  him  and 
contracted  for  land  on  other  estates. 

Chattels  (rob,  Icrepostnoi  Icholop)  might  be  emanci- 
pated by  the  free  will  of  the  master ;  and  a  captive 
carried  away  by  the  Tartars,  or  a  prisoner  of  war  if  a 
Jcholop,  became  free  if  he  succeeded  in  escaping  from 
captivity  and  returning  to  his  country. 

In  the  sixteenth  century,  all  classes  of  the  rural  pop- 


244  SLAVEKY   IN  HISTORY. 

illation  began  to  be  called  Christians  (krestianiri),  the 
Tartars  having  bestowed  this  denomination  on  them  ; 
and  this  name  is  now  legally  in  use.  Under  Tartar 
dominion  the  rural  communities  paid  tribute  per 
head;  and  for  this  reason  their  members  could  not 
change  their  domicile  without  giving  security  to  the 
commune.  But  after  the  overthrow  of  the  Tartars  by 
Iwan  the  Great,  they  recovered  the  freedom  of  circu- 
lation. 

The  primitive  grand-dukes  of  Kief  granted  appa- 
nages to  their  younger  children,  and  sometimes  a 
free  rural  commune  constituted  such  an  appanage. 
Vladimir,  and  after  him  Yaroslaw,  divided  the  em- 
pire among  their  children;  and  thus  originated  the 
rather  independent  dukedoms  of  Twer,  Smolensk, 
Wiazma,  etc.  The  number  of  appanaged  princes  in 
creased  ;  and  when,  after  a  long  and  bloody  struggle, 
the  grand-dukes  of  Moscow  mediatized  all  these  small 
dukes,  appanages  became  private  property,  and  the 
rural  communes  were  owned  by  the  dukes  (kniazia), 
but  under  similar  conditions  of  freedom  as  the  com- 
munes constituting  the  public  domains. 

Toward  the  end  of  the  sixteenth  century,  Borys 
Goudenoff — an  ambitious,  unscrupulous,  but  highly- 
gifted  parvenu — got  control  of  the  weak-minded  Tsar 
Feodor,  ruled  during  his  lifetime,  became  regent  of  the 
empire  after  his  death,  and  finally  a  murderer  and 
usurper.  To  ingratiate  himself  with  the  nobility  and 
the  Bojars,  in  1593  he  published  an  edict  (oukase),  by 
which  the  free  tenants  were  henceforth  prohibited 


SLAVI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,   RUSSIANS.         245 

from  changing  their  masters  or  their  domicile,  and 
were  at  once  reduced  to  serfs,  adscript!  glebce.  This 
first  oppression  quickly  generated  others  still  more 
odious,  which  stopped  not  till  they  ended  in  all  the 
turpitude  of  chattelhood — thus  justifying  the  saying 
of  Lessing :  "  Let  the  devil  but  get  hold  of  one  single 
hair,  and  he  soon  clutches  you  by  the  whole  queue." 
So  in  1597  a  very  rigorous  oukase  was  published  con- 
cerning the  restitution  of  fugitive  serfs,  their  wives, 
children  and  movables.  Another  oukase,  ordering  a 
census  of  all  domestic  servants  to  be  taken,  transformed 
into  serfs  even  those  who,  six  months  before,  had  enter- 
ed private  service  as  absolute  freemen.  With  the  excep- 
tion of  the  population  in  the  free  communes  constitut- 
ing the  tsarian  domains,  all  the  other  rural  populations 
were  thus  transformed  into  serfs  in  the  brief  space  of 
a  few  years. 

During  the  seventeenth  century,  the  tsars  of  the 
house  of  Eomanoff  confirmed  these  oukases.  How- 
ever, the  serfs  were  not  included  in  the  sale  of  an 
estate,  neither  was  it  permitted  to  transfer  them  from 
one  estate  to  another.  There  were  various  specific 
denominations  for  the  different  forms  of  servitude,  ac- 
cording to  the  nature  of  the  labor,  the  quantity  of 
produce,  or  the  number  of  days'  service  levied  by 
the  master. 

In  1718,  Peter  the  Great  ordered  a  general  census 
to  be  taken  all  over  the  empire.  The  census  officials, 
most  probably  through  thoughtlessness  or  caprice,  di- 
vided the  ^\rhole  rural  population  into  two  sections : 


24:6  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

1st.  The  free  peasants  belonging  to  the  crown  or  its 
domains ;  and  2dly.  All  the  rest  of  the  peasantry, 
the  Jcrestianins  or  serfs  living  on  private  estates,  were 
inscribed  as  Ichrepostnoie  kholopy,  that  is,  as  chattels. 
The  primitive  Slavic  communal  organization  thus  sur- 
vived only  on  the  royal  domain,  and  there  it  exists  till 
the  present  day.  The  census  of  Peter  having  thus 
fairly  inaugurated  chattelhood,  it  immediately  began 
to  develop  itself  in  all  its  turpitude.  The  masters 
grew  more  reckless  and  cruel;  they  sold  chattels 
separately  from  the  lands ;  they  brought  them  singly 
into  market,  disregarding  all  family  ties  and  social 
bonds.  Estates  were  no  more  valued  according  to 
the  area  of  land  they  contained,  but  according  to  the 
number  of  their  chattels,  who  were  now  called  souls 
(duschy).  In  short,  all  the  worst  features  of  chattel- 
ism,  as  it  exists  at  the  present  day  in  the  American 
Slave  States,  immediately  followed  the  publication  of 
this  accursed  census. 

The  rural  communes  upon  the  royal  domains,  how- 
ever, still  preserved  their  ancient  organization  and 
even  comparative  freedom ;  but  Peter  the  Great,  as 
well  as  all  his  successors,  rewarded  his  favorites,  or 
those  rendering  public  service,  with  estates  or  grants 
of  land ;  and  as  such  grants  were  taken  from  the  royal 
domains,  in  this  way  hundreds  of  thousands  of  free 
peasants  were  transformed  into  chattels.  Catharine 
II.  also  distributed  great  numbers  of  such  estates 
among  her  favorites,  besides  confirming  all  the  privi- 
leges of  the  nobility;  and  so  likewise  did  Paul  I. 


SLAVI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,   RUSSIANS.         247 

Alexander  I.  desired  to  exempt  the  peasants  in  this 
transfer ;  but  Nicholas  I.  in  reality  was  the  first  em- 
peror who  granted  estates  excepting  therefrom  the 
resident  peasantry ;  he  also  published  an  oukase  that 
henceforth  no  rural  communes  from  the  domains  shall 
be  granted  to  private  individuals.  Paul  I.,  in  1797, 
reduced  the  weekly  servitude  of  the  kholop  to  three 
days,  the  other  three  remaining  to  himself. 

Alexander  I.  desired  to  emancipate  the  serfs  through- 
out the  whole  empire,  but  only  succeeded,  and  that  very 
partially,  in  the  so-called  German  or  Baltic  provinces — 
where,  moreover,  the  German  nobles  and  landowners 
succeed  in  impoverishing  the  peasants  even  more  after 
emancipation  than  they  could  before.  Alexander  I. 
also  prohibited  the  sale  of  single  peasants,  either  male 
or  female,  separate  from  their  families;  he  forbade 
their  sale  in  the  markets ;  and  no  one  could  purchase 
or  own  serfs  unless  he  had  at  the  same  time  twenty 
acres  of  land  for  each  family.  But  all  these  tutelary 
laws  were  more  or  less  evaded  during  his  reign.  He 
permitted  the  nobles  freely  to  emancipate  their  serfs  ; 
but  very  few  of  them  followed  the  example  set  by 
Prince  Alexander  Galitzine  and  a  few  others,  and 
not  more  than  three  hundred  thousand  families  were 
thus  set  free.  Nicholas  I.  also  spoke  favorably  of 
emancipation,  and  even  attempted  it,  but  unsuccess- 
fully. 

During  all  this  period,  military  service  was  a  great 
engine  of  emancipation.  Enlisted  serfs  were  forever 
free,  together  with  their  wives  and  children.  But 


248  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

military  service  lasted  for  twenty-five  or  thirty  years, 
and  was  often  more  oppressive  than  serfdom  in  the 
village. 

During  the  seventeenth  and  eighteenth  centuries, 
the  peasantry  now  and  then  avenged  their  wrongs  by 
isolated  murders  of  the  more  oppressive  masters  and 
their  families.  Partial  insurrections  even  took  place, 
the  most  celebrated  of  which  is  that  of  Pugatschoff 
under  Catharine  II.,  which  swept  over  the  bodies  of 
slain  nobles  and  officials,  from  the  mountains  of  Orem- 
bourg  to  the  very  gates  of  Moscow. 

But  the  day  of  justice  now  dawns  upon  Russia. 
The  whole  Christian  world  glorifies  the  efforts  of 
Alexander  II. ,  supported  by  a  considerable  portion  of 
the  nobles,  to  restore  freedom  and  homesteads  to  the 
twenty  millions  of  serfs.  The  success  of  the  great 
emancipation  movement  is  beyond  doubt,  beyond  even 
the  possibility  of  being  stopped,  although  the  carrying 
out  of  such  a  colossal  revolution  requires  time  and 
meets  with  many  impediments. 

At  the  example  of  Russia  the  tributary  nomads  of 
Asiatic  Tartary  have  emancipated  their  slaves  and 
abjured  further  enslavement;  and  Turkey,  likewise, 
has  inscribed  her  name  upon  the  grand  roll  of  eman- 
cipating empires. 

Thus  the  whole  ancient  world  shakes  off  slavery, 
and  attempts  to  wash  away  its  ancient  and  bloody 
stain  ;  while  the  New  World,  or  at  least  a  part  of  it, 
still  glories  in  the  barbarous  abomination. 

No  special  law  in  Poland  decreed  the  serfdom  of  the 


SLAVI,   SLAVONIANS,   SLAVES,  EUSSIANS.        249 

rural  population,  nor  in  Eussia  their  transformation 
into  chattels.  Nowhere,  indeed,  in  the  whole  history 
of  man  has  the  conception  of  justice  and  law  been  so 
degraded  as  to  legislate  freemen,  or  those  partially  free, 
out  of  their  sacred  and  inherent  rights,  beforehand. 
The  most  bloody  records  of  humanity  have  not  pre- 
served any  such  act  of  legislation,  and  even  the  name 
of  a  Nero  or  a  Heliogabalus  are  free  from  such  a  stain. 
It  was  left  to  the  modern  worshippers  of  the  blood- 
reeking  slave-demon  to  enact  such  laws ;  it  was  left 
to  the  highest  judicial  tribunal  of  the  United  States  to 
brand  into  the  brow  of  justice,  there  to  remain  for 
eternities,  the  infernal  Dred  Scott  decision. 
11* 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY.  251 


XXL 

THESE  pages  do  not  touch  on  slavery  among  the 
Spaniards.  Under  the  Koman  republic  and  empire, 
Spain  shared  the  lot  of  the  other  provinces,  as  Gaul, 
etc. ;  and  what  has  been  said  in  relation  to  slavery  in 
the  Roman  world  applies  to  her  also.  The  results  of 
the  German  invasions,  and  the  establishment  of  the 
Goths  in  Spain,  were  similar  in  their  bearings  to  what 
we  have  already  seen  as  taking  place  in  Gaul  and 
Italy.  Scarcely  had  the  two  races  begun  to  fuse  on 
the  soil  of  Spain,  and  the  relations  between  the  con- 
queror and  the  conquered  to  be  modified  and  softened, 
when  the  invasions  by  the  Moors  (whose  domination 
lasted  for  nearly  seven  centuries),  threw  the  Spaniards 
into  internal  wars.  Their  protracted  efforts  to  expel 
the  invaders  fostered  the  preponderance  of  the  men  of 
the  sword  ;  and  there  is  every  likelihood  that  the  un- 
avoidable sequellse  of  war  contributed  to  preserve 
longer  in  Spain  than  in  any  of  the  other  nationalities 
that  arose  out  of  the  ruins  of  the  Roman  empire,  cer- 
tain of  the  features  of  domestic  slavery,  of  bondage, 
and  the  feudal  tenure.  The  final  expulsion  of  the  Moors 
from  the  Iberian  peninsula  was  almost  immediately 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

followed  by  the  discovery  of  the  continent  of  Amer- 
ica, and  by  the  formation  here  of  a  great  Spanish 
empire,  and  the  introduction  thereinto  of  Africans  as 
domestic  slaves.  To  master  the  various  relations  of 
property  and  villeinage,  of  bondage  and  chattelhood 
in  Spain  and  in  the  Spanish  Main,  requires  special 
studies,  for  which,  indeed,  we  have  as  yet  no  suffic- 
ient material.  At  least  I  had  none  such  within  my 
reach — none  that  was,  to  my  mind,  conclusive  and 
satisfactory.  The  Spanish  republics  nobly  satisfied 
the  hopes  of  humanity  by  abolishing  all  kinds  of 
bondage  and  all  distinctions  of  race.  The  Peruvian 
republic  paid  to  the  owners  three  hundred  dollars  per 
head  for  each  slave,  of  every  age  and  both  sexes,  and 
then  liberated  them.  It  may  be  emphatically  asserted, 
that  the  protracted  political  confusion  prevailing  in 
the  Spanish  American  States,  has  its  sources  not  in  the 
act  of  emancipatory  justice,  but  that  it  is  the  result  of 
altogether  different  causes.  These,  however,  do  not 
come  within  the  compass  of  the  present  investiga- 
tion. 

The  many  analogies  between  domestic  slavery  as 
practised  by  various  nations  and  races  of  the  past, 
and  as  it  •  now  exists  in  our  Slave  States,  have  been 
often  enough  pointed  out.  These  analogies  prove 
beyond  doubt  that  slavery  always  corrupts  the  slave- 
holder and  the  whole  community — be  the  ethnic  pe- 
culiarities of  the  enslaved  race  what  they  may. 

History  shows  slavery  to  have  been  always  most 
luxuriant  in  those  nations  where  society  was  most  dis- 


SLAVERY   IN   HISTOEY.  253 

organized,  just  as  noxious  animals  and  plants  multiply 
in  putrefaction  and  rottenness.  Facts  reveal  to  us 
Low  far  the  disorder  has  already  penetrated  Southern 
life ;  and  it  would  progress  even  more  rapidly  were  it 
not  for  the  purifying  and  healing  influences  (feeble 
though  they  now  be)  coming  from  the  North. 

The  civilized  Christian  world  follows  with  ever-in- 
creasing interest  the  stages  of  the  political  struggle 
in  the  American  Union — sympathizing  deeply  with 
those  who,  though  they  cannot  hope  to  effect  an  im- 
mediate cure,  yet  seek  to  arrest  the  growth  of  the 
fatal  disorder.* 

Slavery  is  as  fatal  to  society  as  are  the  Southern 
and  tropical  swamps  to  human  life.  And  as  material 
culture  drains  the  marshes,  clears  the  forests,  and  ren- 
ders the  soil  productive  and  the  air  healthy :  so  in 
like  manner,  will  moral  and  social  culture  yet  make 
the  institutions  of  this  republic  rich  and  refulgent — 
unblighted  by  the  presence  of  a  slave ! 

The  source  of  many,  if  not  of  all,  the  political  and 
administrative  disorders  in  these  States,  is  to  be  found 
in  the  struggles  occasioned  by  the  arrogant  and  ever- 
lasting encroachments  on  liberty  and  on  the  Union, 

*  "What  in  common  politics  is  called  a  "  party,"  "  an  expedient,"  never 
had  even  the  slightest  influence  upon  my  convictions  or  action — events 
having  furnished 'me  more  than  one  occasion  to  sacrifice  to  principle 
some  leaves  of  my  existence.  I  now  use  my.  right  of  American  citizen- 
ship in  voting  the  "  Republican"  ticket,  the  tendencies  and  actions  of 
that  organization  satisfying  my  convictions.  But  excepting  some  few 
personal  friends,  the  leaders  of  the  party,  whether  in  this  city,  the 
State,  or  the  Union,  are  scarcely  known  to  me  even  by  name. 


254:  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

by  the  militant  worshippers  of  slavery.  To  cure 
these  disorders,  the  growth  of  the  disease — its  expan- 
sion over  yet  uninfected  territories — must  be  stopped  : 
such  must  be  the  first  *step  in  a  sanitary  direction ; 
and  the  paramount  duty  of  self-preservation  now  com- 
mands its  adoption.  This  whole  question  of  Slavery, 
too,  must  be  forced  back  to  where  it  was  left  by  the 
immortal  expounders  of  Southern  instinct  and  intui- 
tion on  slavery,  those  noble  patriots — Henry,  Laurens, 
Washington,  Jefferson,  Mason,  Randolph,  and  a  host 
of  other  great  names — now  forsworn  by  their  political 
descendants.  To  conceal  the  vulture  that  is  devour- 
ing their  vitals,  the  fanatical  upholders  of  slavery 
pervert  and  degrade  all  that  humanity,  morality,  civ- 
ilization and  history  have  recognized  as  sacred. 

The  slave-orators  and  so-called  statesmen  avouch 
"  that  no  one  in  the  South  believes  in  popular  sov- 
ereignty." This  unbelief  is  natural  enough  ;  for  pop- 
ular sovereignty  can  only  exist  in  intelligent,  orderly 
and  laborious  communities.  It  exists  in  the  Free 
States,  and  here  freemen  practically  believe  in  and 
uphold  it.  But  an  ignorant  and  degraded  population 
of  oligarchs,  oppressors  and  slave-breeders  never  were 
capable  of  exercising  popular  sovereignty,  and  conse- 
quently nowhere  could  they  ever  have  faith  in  it : 
barbarians  generally  mistrust  civilization.  Universal 
suffrage  is  not  a  failure  in  the  villages  and  townships 
of  the  Free  States,  though  it  does  fail  on  slave  plan- 
tations, or  among  a  so-called  free  population  drilled 
and  led  by  oligarchs. 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY.  255 

Human  institutions  experience  ups  and  downs — 
they  have  their  luminous  and  their  gloomy  epochs. 
Ignorant  and  debased  masses  throw  a  shadow  over 
universal  suffrage  and  self-government ;  and  only  gen- 
uine freedom  goes  hand  in  hand  with  reason,  knowl- 
edge and  morality.  These,  too,  mutually  reproduce 
each  other.  It  is,  therefore,  easy  to  be  understood 
how  freedom  disappears  from  the  Slave  South,  and  is 
no  more  cherished  or  believed  in. 

Many  consider  the  American  institution  of  self- 
government  as  a  new  experiment ;  and  European  ser- 
viles  and  American  slave  oligarchs  utter  fearful  fore- 
bodings that  the  experiment  is  already  a  failure.  But 
the  prophecy  only  expresses  their  desires.  For  this 
so-called  experiment  is  but  the  natural,  progressive 
development  of  man,  and  for  this  reason  proves  itself 
every  day  more  and  more  successful  in  the  Free 
States.  The  kingdoms  and  nations  of  the  old  world 
are  now  diligently  studying  this  experiment  of  free- 
dom, and  trying  to  appropriate  its  beneficent  results. 
Agents  of  European  governments  uninterruptedly  in- 
vestigate the  system  of  free  communal  schools,  the 
manufactures,  the  inventions,  the  multifarious  indus- 
trial and  agricultural  progress  of  the  Free  States.  But 
no  government  sends  its  messengers  to  study  out  the 
condition  of  slave  plantations,  slave  huts,  or  slave 
pens ;  for  they  know  well  that  by  the  action  of  self- 
government  and  universal  suffrage,  qualitative  and 
quantitative  knowledge  is  more  generally  spread,  and 
has  reached  a  far  higher  grade  in  the  American  Free 


256  SLAVEBY  IN  HISTORY. 

States  than  among  all  the  militant  oligarchs  and 
knight-errants  of  slavery  the  world  over. 

An  experiment  generally  proves  successful  if  made 
with  properly  adapted  and  unadulterated  materials. 
A*  structure  raised  on  a  treacherous  foundation  and 
built  with  rotten  materials  must  fall.  It.  is  an  ex- 
periment altogether  new  to  the  human  race  to  con- 
struct a  society  and  government  with  chattelhood  as 
an  integral  element.  It  is  an  experiment  to  attempt 
to  bring  down  horrified  humanity  on  its  knees  to  the 
worship  of  chattelhood  and  the  devilish  slave  traffic. 
Such  an  experiment  is  now  being  tried  by  the  apostles 
of  slavery ;  and  that  too,  though  morality,  civilization 
and  history  have  unanimously  and  forever  pronounced 
the  sentence  of  condemnation  against  holding  property 
in  man.  The  civilized  and  Christian  world  of  both 
hemispheres  and  every  race  unanimously  awarded  to 
JOHN  BROWN  the  crown  of  a  martyr,  who  fell  in  the 
cause  of  human  liberty. 

One  deviation  from  a  sound  social  principle  is  speed- 
ily followed  by  another ;  violence  ever  begets  violence ; 
and  this  is  the  fatal  genesis  of  all  oppressions  and  tyr- 
annies. The  oligarchic  despotism  in  the  Slave  States 
runs  rapidly  through  all  the  stages  with  which  indi- 
vidual despotism  has  filled  the  dark  records  of  history. 
It  has  already  succeeded  in  the  suppression  of  free 
speech  and  even  free  thought,  violation  of  seal,  cen- 
sorship of  the  press,  and  the  centring  of  political 
control  in  the  hands  of  officials  and  lacqueys.  If  in- 
dividual tyrants  dispatch  their  victims  by  special 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY.  257 

executioners,  lynch  law  and  mob  law — although  often 
executed  by  misguided  "  poor  whites" — are  as  lawless 
as  the  murders  of  the  tyrant,  and  bear  a  striking 
analogy  to  the  executions  perpetrated  by  agents  or 
court-martials.  Despotism  drills  the  masses  in  all 
kinds  of  degradation :  thus  a  part  of  the  population 
of  the  Slave  States  is  drilled  in  ignorance  by  the 
slaveholders,  and  blindly  perpetrate  their  murderous 
biddings.  To  these  deluded  men  who  execute  the 
bloody  behests  of  the  tyrant,  the  words  of  the  Christ 
on  Calvary  apply :  "  Forgive  them ;  for  they  knoio 
not  what  they  do." 

A  society  based  on  a  violation  of  cardinal  human 
rights  can  never  be  considered  free.  Freemen  are 
never  governed  by  violent  passions.  Injustice  and 
tyranny  cannot  recede ;  they  divorce  themselve*  from 
mercy,  and  are  guilty  of  the  most  remorseless  actions : 
thus  fatally,  of  late,  the  gallows  was  once  more  en- 
nobled. Executions  and  burning  at  the  stake,  amid 
the  applaudings  of  the  ignorant  a'nd  the  infuriated, 
are  nothing  new  in  history ;  and  neither  is  the  trans- 
mission of  the  names  of  the  murderers  to  the  mal- 
edictions of  eternity. 

Human  society  will  perhaps  always  be  subject,  in 
one  shape  or  another,  to  wrongs  and  disorders :  but 
humanity  specially  revolts  at  the  hideous  wrongs 
which  now  exist,  such  as  the  claim  of  property  in 
man,  and  the  traffic  in  man.  As  long  as  this  claim 
is  found  on  the  legal  record,  as  long  as  slavery  exists 
as  a  common  fact,  futile  will  be  all  efforts  to  stifle 


258  SLAVERY   IN   HISTORY. 

the  voice  of  freedom,  to  crush  into  oblivion  the  ques- 
tion of  slavery,  or  to  expel  it  from  the  chambers  of 
legislation  or  the  tribunals  of  the  people.  It  will  and 
must  ever  reappear  on  the  surface: — as  in  bodily 
disorders,  when  the  virus  has  eaten  its  way  into  the 
innermost  organism,  external  eruptions  may  be  locally, 
healed  or  closed  up,  but  again  they  reappear  on 
another  spot,  or  attack  another  organ,  until  a  radical 
cure  relieves  the  body  from  the  poison.  Until  utterly 
destroyed,  slavery  will  always  be  paramount  to  all 
other  political  questions,  to  all  political  complications, 
and  it  will  forever  force  its  way  into  them  all.  To  a 
greater  or  less  degree,  diseases  assume  the  character- 
istics of  a  prevailing  epidemic.  When  several  dis- 
eases are  complicated  together,  the  physician  first 
attempts  to  cure  the  most  virulent  and  dangerous. 
This  question  of  slavery  must  have  a  solution ;  and 
it  is  in  vain  that  the  weak-minded  deny  the  existence 
of  the  devouring  disorder,  or  attempt  to  conjure  it 
with  paltry  expedients. 

Humanity  would  gratefully  applaud  even  an  inter- 
mediate step  from  absolute  chattelhood  toward  emanci- 
pation, or  any  public  measure  foreshadowing  an  inten- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  slaveholding  States  to  become 
humane.  First  of  all,  let  them  recognize  in  the  bond- 
man the  sacred,  imprescriptible,  natural  rights  of  man 
and  of  family;  then  let  them  abandon  the  slave  traffic, 
and  thus  avoid  separation  of  man  and  wife,  of  parent 
and  child.  Even  the  transformation  of  the  slaves  into 
serfSj.into  adscripti  glebce,  would  be  an  alleviation,  and 


SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY.  259 

a  cheering  sign  of  progress.  Certainly,  there  are 
economic  impediments  which  stand  in  the  way  of  im- 
mediate and  absolute  emancipation.  The  emanci- 
pated might  be  interested  in  labor,  in  the  soil,  and  in 
freedom,  by  the  possession  of  homesteads,  even  if  they 
remained  under  the  control  of  their  masters.  The 
noble  examples  set  by  Pr-ussia  and  Russia  in  Europe, 
and  by  England  in  her  West  Indian  possessions,  might 
be  modified  and  adapted  to  circumstances  and  to  spe- 
cial conditions.  But  the  present  extollers  of  human 
bondage  never  will  listen  to  the  imploring  voice  of 
humanity,  or  to  the  admonishing  warnings  of  history ; 
they  deliberately  prepare  volcanic  eruptions  for  com- 
ing generations. 

Pro-slavery  orators  sometimes  grow  florid,  senti- 
mental, and  idyllic  in  their  praises  and  glorification 
of  slavery.  But  gaseous  speeches  emanate  not  from 
vigorous  or  healthy  minds.  Gas  generally  arises  from 
substances  in  process  of  decomposition.  Posterity 
venerates  only  the  names  of  the  orators  who  stand 
up  for  a  sacred  cause  or  a  grand  idea,  who  act 
under  generous  impulses,  who  defend  human  rights 
and  liberties,  and  who  brand  with  infamy  every  kind 
of  oppression. 

Every  day  freedom  gets  a  firmer  and  more  enduring 
foothold  in  Europe.  Every  nation  of  the  old  continent 
enjoys  greater  liberty  to-day  than  it  did  on  the  birth- 
day of  the  American  Republic.  The  disorders  which 
are  the  accumulation  of  almost  countless  centuries, 
slowly,  but  nevertheless  uninterruptedly,  melt  away 


260  SLAVERY  IN  HISTORY. 

before  the  breath  of  the  ever-vigorous  spirit  of  hu- 
manity. After  a  protracted  experience  of  sufferings, 
old  Europe,  centuries  ago,  got  rid  of  domestic  slavery. 
But  what  civilization  and  humanity  assert  to  be 
their  greatest  afflictions  are  upheld  as  blessings  in  this 
~New  World  by  the  Young  Republic.  Sadness  and 
even  despair  fill  the  mind  when  witnessing  the  loftiest 
and  best  social  structure  ever  erected  by  man  sapped 
to  its  foundations  by  the  sacrilegious  champions  of 
human  bondage ! 


THE   END. 


14  DAY  USE 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWE1 

LOAN  DEPT. 

^w^^^sssa.^ 


72  -12  AM  6  0 


LD21A-60m-8,'70 
(N8837slO)476— A-32 


General  Library     _ 
University  of  California 
Berkeley 


YB  06556 


